EVs are running out of customers

[JonC]

My point is that there are reasons we have these departments. Some may not be needed. The DOE isn't one of them.

The problem is when these federal agencies exceed their purpose.

 

[KenH]

The Federal government, managed by the Atomic Energy Commission. The Atomic Energy Commission was dissolved in 1975.

Bring back the AEC, then. If the size, scope, and reach of the federal government was reduced to what it was in 1974, when President Richard Nixon resigned, I would consider that a great starting point.

 

[JonC]

Bring back the AEC, then. If the size, scope, and reach of the federal government was reduced to what it was in 1974, when President Richard Nixon resigned, I would consider that a great starting point.

The AEC doesn't make sense anymore. It was involved primarily with the development of nuclear weapons.

Why not just limit the DOE?

 

[KenH]

Things have changed since the 1890's.

Well, I would take the 1960s when I was a kid, laying on a cot out in the country in my grandma's front yard during the summer, seeing a sky full of stars and looking for the occasional shooting star or airplane or satellite overhead, and listening to the Houston Astros game on the radio, and getting up occasionally to catch a lightning bug in a jar.

 

[KenH]

Why not just limit the DOE?

Okay. Limit the DOE to what the AEC was in 1974.

 

[JonC]

Bring back the AEC, then. If the size, scope, and reach of the federal government was reduced to what it was in 1974, when President Richard Nixon resigned, I would consider that a great starting point.

BTW...here's a "funny" story.

Annually we have to give a liter bottle of urine for sampling and take a whole body scan (checking for internal contamination).

The scan lasts 4 minutes.

I was flagged, had to wait and do it again.
I was flagged a second time, had to wait.
I had to put on scrubs and plastic shoes for a longer scan.

They had asked me if I had been in a contaminated area that morning. I was just coming in to work so I hadn't

They asked me if I eat wild game. I don't.

After a couple of hours they decided it was internal background (whatever). It wasn't too high was what I got out of it.

Driving on to my facility I remembered a coworker had made tacos with deer meat.

Since the 1940's deer meat contains cesium (because of fallout from the nuclear bombs and nuclear testing).

 

[JonC]

Okay. Limit the DOE to what the AEC was in 1974.

Can't. They were in charge of developing nuclear weapons. The nuclear waste was not dealt with.

 

[Van]

As I said Van you are dreaming if you think that EV's will be able to do any real work. As for plugging in one EV no problem but you want it just to be EV's and that is just a pipe dream. As for you Prius that is just a toy car that makes the enviro's feel good.

Please do not make up views, then attribute them to me, as these tend to be mistaken views.

I have stated facts, and if you think one or more are not facts, please quote my assertion and provide your basis for denial.

 

[Van]

I do not care why China did anything and you are the one that wants to change the channel. We are not talking about batteries but whether EV's will rule the world. That is just a dream. The grid will not allow for all those EV's and you know this although you will still push your enviro view. We will have combustion engines around for years to come.

LOL, did I say or even suggest EV's will "rule the world?" Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.
Did I say the electric grid as existing today (2023) will support the EV load plus our existing load? Nope. Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.
You also have no basis for claiming knowledge of my "enviro view." Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.

 

[Silverhair]

Please do not make up views, then attribute them to me, as these tend to be mistaken views.

I have stated facts, and if you think one or more are not facts, please quote my assertion and provide your basis for denial.

Then stop coming up with the silly ideas you have about EV's being able to do actual work.

 

[KenH]

Then stop coming up with the silly ideas you have about EV's being able to do actual work.

Get him, Silverhair!

 

[Van]

Then stop coming up with the silly ideas you have about EV's being able to do actual work.

EV's can do no actual work. Many use Ford F-150 Ligntning pick-ups for their work such as hauling needed supplies.
EV's are selling well, since they still have many flaws. No one will even consider why America has not yet built state of the art manufacturing plants for LFP battery cell production. My answer is "Bribe-O-nomics."

 

[KenH]

No one will even consider why America has not yet built state of the art manufacturing plants for LFP battery cell production.

"Building on Ford’s commitment to American manufacturing, Ford announced today it is investing $3.5 billion to build the country’s first automaker-backed LFP battery plant, offering customers a second battery technology within Ford’s EV lineup.

This plant – called BlueOval Battery Park Michigan – initially will employ 2,500 people when production of LFP batteries begins in 2026. Ford will have the option to further grow its battery capacity at its Marshall, Michigan, plant, which will be part of a wholly owned Ford subsidiary.

With this $3.5 billion investment, Ford and its battery tech collaborators have announced $17.6 billion in investments in electric vehicle and battery production in the United States since 2019, as part of the company’s commitment to invest over $50 billion in electric vehicles globally through 2026. In the next three years, these investments will lead to more than 18,000 direct jobs in Michigan, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio and Missouri and more than 100,000 indirect jobs, according to the methodology from a 2020 independent study."

- rest at https://media.ford.com/content/ford...ew-lfp-battery-plant--new-battery-chemis.html

 

[Silverhair]

LOL, did I say or even suggest EV's will "rule the world?" Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.
Did I say the electric grid as existing today (2023) will support the EV load plus our existing load? Nope. Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.
You also have no basis for claiming knowledge of my "enviro view." Please stop attributing to me views which you have fabricated.

Read your posts. You keep supporting dreams. The cost is to high, the environmental damage is to great, the grid will not support them, they are not practical for hot or cold climates, air conditioning or heating drains the power thus range. Even if we had the grid to support them where are you to get the power for the grid so you can charge them? You are supporting the enviro dream that has not been thought threw.

Any views that I have attributed to you are only formulated from your comments. Just as you could formulate my views of EV's from my comments. They are a rich man's dream that the average man cannot afford.

 

[Van]

"Building on Ford’s commitment to American manufacturing, Ford announced today it is investing $3.5 billion to build the country’s first automaker-backed LFP battery plant, offering customers a second battery technology within Ford’s EV lineup.

This plant – called BlueOval Battery Park Michigan – initially will employ 2,500 people when production of LFP batteries begins in 2026. Ford will have the option to further grow its battery capacity at its Marshall, Michigan, plant, which will be part of a wholly owned Ford subsidiary.

With this $3.5 billion investment, Ford and its battery tech collaborators have announced $17.6 billion in investments in electric vehicle and battery production in the United States since 2019, as part of the company’s commitment to invest over $50 billion in electric vehicles globally through 2026. In the next three years, these investments will lead to more than 18,000 direct jobs in Michigan, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio and Missouri and more than 100,000 indirect jobs, according to the methodology from a 2020 independent study."

- rest at https://media.ford.com/content/ford...ew-lfp-battery-plant--new-battery-chemis.html

No one will even consider why America has not yet built state of the art manufacturing plants for LFP battery cell production.
Did anyone say what will or will not be built. And by the way, this plant will make China licensed cells, not home grown cells.

 

[Van]

Read your posts. You keep supporting dreams. The cost is to high, the environmental damage is to great, the grid will not support them, they are not practical for hot or cold climates, air conditioning or heating drains the power thus range. Even if we had the grid to support them where are you to get the power for the grid so you can charge them? You are supporting the enviro dream that has not been thought threw.

Any views that I have attributed to you are only formulated from your comments. Just as you could formulate my views of EV's from my comments. They are a rich man's dream that the average man cannot afford.

Did I see where you supported all the false claims I identified? Nope.
Did I say EV are cost competitive now? Nope, but that is the false claim.
Did I address environmental damage from the production cycle of EV's? Nope But LFP batteries will lessen potential damage.
Did I say the current grid will support the future load demand of extensive use of EV? Nope

On and on, folks, the denial of these facts:
Every other day it seems another "bash the EV transition" article or claim is fabricated.
If people are not buying EV's then fewer EV's should be produced to meet market demand. You do not see De Soto or Studebaker or Hudson nameplates in New Car Dealerships.

1) Are our current EV's equipped with LFP batteries made in the USA by American companies using American designs? Nope
2) Are our current EV's competitively priced without Government subsidies? Nope
3) Is the operating cost of an EV less than a fossil fueled vehicle? You bet!

 

[Silverhair]

Did I see where you supported all the false claims I identified? Nope.
Did I say EV are cost competitive now? Nope, but that is the false claim.
Did I address environmental damage from the production cycle of EV's? Nope But LFP batteries will lessen potential damage.
Did I say the current grid will support the future load demand of extensive use of EV? Nope

On and on, folks, the denial of these facts:
Every other day it seems another "bash the EV transition" article or claim is fabricated.
If people are not buying EV's then fewer EV's should be produced to meet market demand. You do not see De Soto or Studebaker or Hudson nameplates in New Car Dealerships.

1) Are our current EV's equipped with LFP batteries made in the USA by American companies using American designs? Nope
2) Are our current EV's competitively priced without Government subsidies? Nope
3) Is the operating cost of an EV less than a fossil fueled vehicle? You bet!

Do you continue in your EV dream? You Bet.

Some day in the future EV's or something like them may be practical and the average person may even be able to afford one. They may even be able to do actual work and be charged in a reasonable amount of time. But that is not now or in the near future so you are just promoting a dream.

In reply to this question "You do not see De Soto or Studebaker or Hudson nameplates in New Car Dealerships" The nameplate may change but the means of power has not, still internal combustion engines.

 

[John of Japan]

I live in Alberta so not much salt water are many hurricane but we do get lots of clod and snow. Does that count

Nope, got to have the salt.

 

[Silverhair]

Nope, got to have the salt.

We have salt, but we use it to melt the ice on the roads.

 

[John of Japan]

We have salt, but we use it to melt the ice on the roads.

Aha! My experiences in Wisconsin say that used to be a big cause of cars getting rusty. Nowadays cars seem more protected from rust due to salt water, but there are still plenty of rusty cars around here.

Don't know if the road salt hurts an EV battery, though. Anyone?