The REAL EV vehicle discussion thread.....

[Yellowtail]

59 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

In some countries the duration of the warranty is enforced by Goverment agencies In  the US they have stated if you want to sell 

Most automakers have an 8 to 10-year or 100,000 miles warranty period on their batteries. This is because federal regulation in the U.S. mandates that electric car batteries be covered for a minimum of eight years.

https://www.greencars.com/guides/definitive-guide-to-electric-car-batteries-range

So that they typically provide only the government mandated minimum tells us something, yes? 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Virtually none of Norway's and little of Germany's. Germany installed a lot of capacity, but that's not really what actually gets used. 

 

Yes, about 2% of capacity over the last twenty years has shifted to wind and solar, while reliance on fossil fuels has actually increased. 

Well, Norway's electricity is 99% from renewables. In this case, hydropower. As for Germany, I have no idea where you get your nonsense from

Renewables cover 50% of German electricity consumption in first quarter 2022

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-50-german-electricity-consumption-first-quarter-2022

 

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germanys-renewable-power-share-climbs-46-percent-2020-preliminary-data

 

Wind is now the biggest single contributor followed by biomass.

 

[placeholder]

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So that they typically provide only the government mandated minimum tells us something, yes? 

What does it tell us that the typical guarantee for an ICE vehicle powertrain is 5 years/60,000 miles? Do ICE vehicles loss all or most of their value at that point?

[vinny41]

24 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So that they typically provide only the government mandated minimum tells us something, yes? 

No In 2019 if you purchased  hyundai kona in the US  it came with a lifetime battery warranty ( Original owner only)

That was withdrawn for 2020 and now they offer High-voltage battery 10 years / 200,000km ( US not sure about other countries)

Edited July 1, 2022 by vinny41
add

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

How & so should be self explanatory.

In other words, you have no idea, it's just something you think sounds good. 

 

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

If not, I can't be bothered.

It is interesting, albeit telling that you have plenty of time to generate post after post, but can't be bothered to support your claim. 

 

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Incentives, yes, as many don't have a spare 100-350k sitting around, to wait for a 5 or 10 ROI.  Doesn't take anything from the poor and give to the rich, quite the opposite, and makes the poor non dependent on the rich.

The poor already get a subsidized rate, it's the rich that have air-conditioning and own real estate that would benefit, people like you. It's no wonder you support it. You want a new EV and a new solar installation to charge it and you (apparently) think it only fair that someone else pay for it.  

 

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Frees up the grid, even feeds the grid for others, locations, complexes that can't self generate enough energy.   That's a win win all around.

No, it's only a "win" for people like you that will benefit directly from the subsidies. Everyone one else will have to pay for your subsidy.

 

Government mandates and subsidies are always a great indicator of what really makes economic sense. 

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

No In 2019 if you purchased  hyundai kona in the US  it came with a lifetime battery warranty ( Original owner only)

That was withdrawn for 2020 and now they offer High-voltage battery 10 years / 200,000km ( US not sure about other countries)

That does not answer my question. What do you think this shows? They provided a lifetime warranty in hopes that they could gain market share, and withdrew it as soon as they could because they know it to be a loser. 

 

Most automakers in US lose money on EVs, and would not build them if they did not have to. 

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

 

First off, asserting "You've got nothing" isn't name calling. I'm arguing you have nothing because you never respond to points I've raised with facts but only name calling and unbacked accusations.  And because you keep on raising new points rather than answer my replies. And now you've done it again.

Can't you ever produce anything that's written? Are videos all you've got? Find me something in writing from this Graham Conway person and I'll read it. All I know of him is that he's an engineer and works for a company whose clients are from the oil and gas industry.

 

Jesus, you can't even read a graph? Doesn't suit your narrative?

"You have nothing" is just gaslighting. You keep repeating it like a mantra as protection against the EV turd that's been put in your battery-powered punch bowl.

I'm a retired scientist with 50 years experience in private industry. Scepticism is part of my skill set, with a well-developed BS meter. Saying I am hero-worshipping is another attempt at gaslighting.

I am putting forward facts, which you conveniently ignore. If a child of yours came to you and said they had got 8% in an exam, and flunked 92%, would you deem that acceptable?

Raising new points in discussion is what intelligent people do. Reiterating the same old arguments in a circle displays a lack of imagination, and laziness.

Edited July 1, 2022 by Lacessit

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Got any links to prove your ridiculous claims?

Perhaps you have not heard. There is a war going on in Ukraine, Russia is cutting off gas and oil supplies to those countries that won't pay in rubles. Germany is among the most vulnerable of the European countries.

Do you need a link for that, or can you just read any newspaper, given your video aversion?

[Yellowtail]

53 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, Norway's electricity is 99% from renewables. In this case, hydropower. As for Germany, I have no idea where you get your nonsense from

We were talking about wind and solar, not by hydro-power, which has been around for well over a hundred years. 

 

53 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Renewables cover 50% of German electricity consumption in first quarter 2022

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-50-german-electricity-consumption-first-quarter-2022

 

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germanys-renewable-power-share-climbs-46-percent-2020-preliminary-data

 

Wind is now the biggest single contributor followed by biomass.

 

The graph is by capacity, not by what is actually realized.  

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Perhaps you have not heard. There is a war going on in Ukraine, Russia is cutting off gas and oil supplies to those countries that won't pay in rubles. Germany is among the most vulnerable of the European countries.

Do you need a link for that, or can you just read any newspaper, given your video aversion?

What has that got to do with yellowtails false claims below in quotes. If anything the shortfall in fossil fuel supply would increase the percentage of renewables used.

 

 "Germany installed a lot of capacity, but that's not really what actually gets used. 

 

Yes, about 2% of capacity over the last twenty years has shifted to wind and solar, while reliance on fossil fuels has actually increased. "

[placeholder]

44 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It is interesting, albeit telling that you have plenty of time to generate post after post, but can't be bothered to support your claim. 

This is truly laughable coming as it does from one of the most, shall we say, inventive posters here. And who apparently can't be bothered to provide evidence for his claims.

[Yellowtail]

9 minutes ago, placeholder said:

What has that got to do with yellowtails false claims below in quotes. If anything the shortfall in fossil fuel supply would increase the percentage of renewables used.

 

 "Germany installed a lot of capacity, but that's not really what actually gets used. 

 

Yes, about 2% of capacity over the last twenty years has shifted to wind and solar, while reliance on fossil fuels has actually increased. "

Sorry, the 2% was a world claim, not Germany only, I should have made that clear. 

 

Also, that is total energy, not just electricity. 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2022 by Yellowtail
clarity

[placeholder]

11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

We were talking about wind and solar, not by hydro-power, which has been around for well over a hundred years. 

 

The graph is by capacity, not by what is actually realized.  

False. What does this sentence mean to you?

"Renewables cover 50% of German electricity consumption in first quarter 2022"

If it were what you claimed, that would be called installed capacity.

 

If it were what you claimed, that would be called installed capacity.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2022 by placeholder

[vinny41]

44 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

That does not answer my question. What do you think this shows? They provided a lifetime warranty in hopes that they could gain market share, and withdrew it as soon as they could because they know it to be a loser. 

 

Most automakers in US lose money on EVs, and would not build them if they did not have to. 

I see some some brands have closed their Reservation program for ordering new EV, some dealers who are independent franchises from the automakers are applying additional markups ranging from $40,00-$70,000 USD

I doubt US automakers are losing money on building vehicles as that would result in bankruptcy or closure

similar some people are hoping that brands in Thailand will absorb increased battery costs which some have increased by 500% 

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

False. What does this sentence mean to you?

"Renewables cover 50% of German electricity consumption in first quarter 2022"

If it were what you claimed, that would be called installed capacity.

 

If it were what you claimed, that would be called installed capacity.

 

 

What it means to me, is that the author(s) like to play fast and loose with the facts when it suits them, or that they were liberal arts majors or that they are stupid, or (more likley) a combination of all three. 

 

What does it tell you? 

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Sorry, the 2% was a world claim, not Germany only, I should have made that clear. 

 

 

Wind and solar generated 10% of global electricity in 2021 - a world first

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/04/wind-solar-electricity-global-energy/

 

71% of electric power supply added in 2021 was wind or solar.

 

Renewables Take Lion’s Share of Global Power Additions in 2021 

https://irena.org/newsroom/pressreleases/2022/Apr/Renewables-Take-Lions-Share-of-Global-Power-Additions-in-2021

 

 

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What it means to me, is that the author(s) like to play fast and loose with the facts when it suits them, or that they were liberal arts majors or that they are stupid, or (more likley) a combination of all three. 

 

What does it tell you? 

It tells me that you've got nothing so you indulge in insults and create falsehoods to cover up for that fact. Stop lying.

[Jai Dee]

A deliberate troll post has been removed.

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

I see some some brands have closed their Reservation program for ordering new EV,...

The Ford f-150 Lighting for example. Their schedule is three years out. 

 

Incidentally, the battery in this weighs about a ton....

 

1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

some dealers who are independent franchises from the automakers are applying additional markups ranging from $40,00-$70,000 USD

The dealers do fine with markups, but that does not help most manufacturers.

 

What US automobile has a $40,000 markup, much less $70,000? 

 

1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

I doubt US automakers are losing money on building vehicles as that would result in bankruptcy or closure

similar some people are hoping that brands in Thailand will absorb increased battery costs which some have increased by 500% 

The legacy automakers make money on most models, but lose money on EVs. They only build them because they have to, and once built, they have to try to sell them. 

 

[vinny41]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The Ford f-150 Lighting for example. Their schedule is three years out. 

 

Incidentally, the battery in this weighs about a ton....

 

The dealers do fine with markups, but that does not help most manufacturers.

 

What US automobile has a $40,000 markup, much less $70,000? 

 

The legacy automakers make money on most models, but lose money on EVs. They only build them because they have to, and once built, they have to try to sell them. 

 

Ford dealers are defying company orders with insane F-150 Lightning markups

https://www.teslarati.com/ford-dealers-are-defying-company-orders-with-insane-f-150-lightning-markups/

 

For Most automakers every vehicle that comes off the production line is already sold to a dealer  in most cases the dealer already has received an order from an end customer

[placeholder]

53 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Jesus, you can't even read a graph? Doesn't suit your narrative?

"You have nothing" is just gaslighting. You keep repeating it like a mantra as protection against the EV turd that's been put in your battery-powered punch bowl.

I'm a retired scientist with 50 years experience in private industry. Scepticism is part of my skill set, with a well-developed BS meter. Saying I am hero-worshipping is another attempt at gaslighting.

I am putting forward facts, which you conveniently ignore. If a child of yours came to you and said they had got 8% in an exam, and flunked 92%, would you deem that acceptable?

Raising new points in discussion is what intelligent people do. Reiterating the same old arguments in a circle displays a lack of imagination, and laziness.

You have yet to answer any of the points I raised that refuted the claims made by the car salesman. Not one. Not one. And as for your  point about the 8 percent, what makes you think that ICE vehicles are the only target for reduction of CO2 gases? And by the way, where did you come up with that 8% figure

Here's a chart from a rather more reputable source than your car guy. It puts road transport at 11.9%

https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

[Yellowtail]

6 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Ford dealers are defying company orders with insane F-150 Lightning markups

https://www.teslarati.com/ford-dealers-are-defying-company-orders-with-insane-f-150-lightning-markups/

 

For Most automakers every vehicle that comes off the production line is already sold to a dealer  in most cases the dealer already has received an order from an end customer

I guess people love them. As I understand it, Ford is splitting the EV sales from ICEV sales. 

 

In any event, that the dealership marks it up $40K does not help Ford directly. 

 

Everything built is "sold", but at least historically, I do not believe most dealers have orders before delivery. With the current shortages this has likely changed. 

[Lacessit]

16 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You have yet to answer any of the points I raised that refuted the claims made by the car salesman. Not one. Not one. And as for your  point about the 8 percent, what makes you think that ICE vehicles are the only target for reduction of CO2 gases? And by the way, where did you come up with that 8% figure

Here's a chart from a rather more reputable source than your car guy. It puts road transport at 11.9%

https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

Ignore.

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Ignore.

Both me and reality. 

[vinny41]

Automotive manufacturers are the brands that everyone knows — Ford and Toyota and BMW and their competitors.

 

These firms are commonly referred to OEMs (original equipment manufacturers),

 

While these manufacturers produce some original equipment, their real strength is in designing cars, marketing ordering the parts from suppliers, and assemble

https://medium.com/self-driving-cars/the-automotive-supply-chain-explained-d4e74250106f

 

If we step back in time approx 25 years OEM such as Ford and GM had their own manufacturing divisions Visteon being part of Ford and Delphi Technologies part of GM. Both Visteon and  Delphi Technologies were sold off by their parent brand in the late 1990s

Today most Automotive Brands retain their own  manufacturing for key Components such as engine, gearbox sometimes wholly manufactured by the OEM/Brand and sometimes through Joint Ventures between OEM and XXX

Tier 1 Suppliers

Companies that supply parts or systems directly to OEMs are called Tier 1 suppliers. Some of these brands are recognizable, like Bosch or Continental. Some of them are less so.

OEM approach Tier 1 suppliers and provide them for example specs of a battery that they require for vehicle xxx which will be sold in these countries .The Oem will specify the length of warranty required and the criteria of what is required for a warranty claim.

When Tier 1 suppliers submit their bid cost to OEM built into that bid cost is amount that is set aside for warranty claims 

The OEM manages the warranty claims system on behalf of the end customer and their Tier 1 suppliers and their own  manufacturing divisions

 

Auto Parts Supplier Warranty Report:

Slowly but surely, the companies that manufacture powertrain components such as engines and transmissions have seen their share of the warranty expenses rise,

https://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20200326.html

 

Customers want longer extend warranties but don't want to pay for those longer warranties through increased cost of vehicles

 

As for dealerships some oem would prefer to sell directly to end customer if they were allowed to

Why Can’t Car Manufacturers Direct Sell to Consumers?

 

Every car manufacturer has to play by certain rules when it comes to selling their vehicles. There are a number of laws that strictly prohibit a manufacturer from selling directly to their consumers.

https://www.motorhills.com/why-cant-car-manufacturers-direct-sell-to-consumers/#:~:text=It isn't illegal for,saving a ton of money.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2022 by vinny41
add

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Automotive manufacturers are the brands that everyone knows — Ford and Toyota and BMW and their competitors.

These firms are commonly referred to OEMs (original equipment manufacturers), which is an unfortunate misnomer. While these manufacturers produce some original equipment, their real strength is in designing cars, marketing cars, ordering the parts from suppliers, and assembling the final product.

https://medium.com/self-driving-cars/the-automotive-supply-chain-explained-d4e74250106f

 

If we step back in time approx 25 years OEM such as Ford and GM had their own manufacturing divisions Visteon being part of Ford and Delphi Technologies part of GM. Both Visteon and  Delphi Technologies were sold off by their parent brand in the late 1990s

Today most Automotive Brands retain their own  manufacturing for key Components such as engine, gearbox sometimes wholly manufactured by the OEM/Brand and sometimes through Joint Ventures between OEM and XXX

Tier 1 Suppliers

Companies that supply parts or systems directly to OEMs are called Tier 1 suppliers. Some of these brands are recognizable, like Bosch or Continental. Some of them are less so.

OEM approach Tier 1 suppliers and provide them for example specs of a battery that they require for vehicle xxx which will be sold in these countries .The Oem will specify the length of warranty required and the criteria of what is required for a warranty claim.

When Tier 1 suppliers submit their bid cost to OEM built into that bid cost is amount that is set aside for warranty claims 

The OEM manages the warranty claims system on behalf of the end customer and their Tier 1 suppliers and their own  manufacturing divisions

Auto Parts Supplier Warranty Report:

Slowly but surely, the companies that manufacture powertrain components such as engines and transmissions have seen their share of the warranty expenses rise, while the other parts suppliers have seen their share slowly shrink. And both claims and reserves are at record levels.

https://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20200326.html

 

Customers want longer extend warranties but don't want to pay for those longer warranties through increased cost of vehicles

 

As for dealerships some oem would prefer to sell directly to end customer if they were allowed to

Why Can’t Car Manufacturers Direct Sell to Consumers?

Every car manufacturer has to play by certain rules when it comes to selling their vehicles. There are a number of laws that strictly prohibit a manufacturer from selling directly to their consumers. It is highly illegal for Ford to sell you a car and drop it off in your driveway. The only exception is Tesla, but that’s because they’re using a loophole (more on that later).

https://www.motorhills.com/why-cant-car-manufacturers-direct-sell-to-consumers/#:~:text=It isn't illegal for,saving a ton of money.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Selling directly to consumers depends on state law, not federal. Some states allow it, others don't.

[seedy]

A blow for all those advocating renewables, in the USA, and giving EPA bureaucrats power to limit carbon emissions - from power plants to vehicles ...

 

"In a 6-3 ruling, the court sided with the conservative states and fossil-fuel companies, agreeing that the EPA did not have the authority to impose such sweeping measures."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

[KhunLA]

11 minutes ago, seedy said:

A blow for all those advocating renewables, in the USA, and giving EPA bureaucrats power to limit carbon emissions - from power plants to vehicles ...

 

"In a 6-3 ruling, the court sided with the conservative states and fossil-fuel companies, agreeing that the EPA did not have the authority to impose such sweeping measures."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

That depends how you look at the 'mandates' and what they actually say.  Many mandate state so many % of EVs by a certain date, with an 'IF POSSIBLE' clause.  Meaning if grid or other reason, won't support the mandate, it may be modified at that future time.

 

Disrupting the grid purposely, by limiting available production, by limited fossil fuel burning would do that.  Actually giving big oil/fossil fuel suppliers a much longer life span.   

 

You'd be surprise how things may or may not happen behind closed doors.  Got to look at the big picture and the long game.

 

Just a thought ...

[Yellowtail]

47 minutes ago, seedy said:

A blow for all those advocating renewables, in the USA, and giving EPA bureaucrats power to limit carbon emissions - from power plants to vehicles ...

 

"In a 6-3 ruling, the court sided with the conservative states and fossil-fuel companies, agreeing that the EPA did not have the authority to impose such sweeping measures."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

Actually they sided with the idea of limited government. The ruling made it clear that while the EPA does not currently have the right, there is nothing stopping Congress from giving them the right if that's what they/we want. 

[placeholder]

15 hours ago, seedy said:

A blow for all those advocating renewables, in the USA, and giving EPA bureaucrats power to limit carbon emissions - from power plants to vehicles ...

 

"In a 6-3 ruling, the court sided with the conservative states and fossil-fuel companies, agreeing that the EPA did not have the authority to impose such sweeping measures."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

Actually, coal is on its way out because of economics because of economics. It's too expensive. Gas peaker plants are now being outcompeted, too. In addition, there's nothing stopping states from regulating power plants within its borders.