How about hydrogen vehicle? I always thought hydrogen will be future? Shell has been building hydrogen filling stations in Europe.

 

No one solely charges off the fast chargers. They mostly do it at their house, and if they are paying $0.13 per kw (all depends on where you live), if they drove 750 miles per month, they would spend ~$30 a month to charge, vs over $100 per month to fuel an F150. Economically it takes years to make up the premium EVs generally cost (most don’t buy the slow accelerating, slow charging, short range models, so they pay quite a premium over the listed base price), but then again, most people aren’t buying EVs (or even their gas F150s) solely off a cost benefit analysis. It’s emotions that get us to make most of our purchases. Even though I wouldn’t buy the Lightning in its current version, I have no doubt Ford will sell lots.

And all of you other claims are false (insufficient grid, range too short to do anything, unproven tech). Tesla has already proven all of those claims are false. The biggest gripe most Tesla owners have is the reliability of the little things (fit and finish, etc.), not anything to do with the drive ability or charging of the vehicles.

 

Oh yeah, those other claims are way off. I am tired of the grid argument, our lack of maintenance on the electrical grid because greed has taken a front seat to reliability and modernization isn't a problem with EVs, we can improve the grid. Range is fine for a VAST majority of what you do with your vehicle day-to-day. There are edge cases, people that live in remote areas and have long commutes and maybe have a trailer every day. But 300 miles or even 200 miles is way more than most people do daily. Again, and hopefully for the last time but I doubt it, you charge the vehicle and start with a "full tank" every morning. Every. Morning. No stops at the gas station on the way to work or whatever. Tesla as was noted has had no issues with people doing cross country drives, I mentioned a YouTube channel where the guy cross country drives all kinds of EVs, including the Mach E.

If you tow often, or do 800+ mile trips every month, then stick to gas for now. But an overwhelming majority of people don't do that, and especially with Ford only having ~80k Lightning trucks it can build the first year, they aren't looking to replace all vehicles.

Stop listening to pundits that are getting kickbacks from fossil fuel companies and actually look into the current state of EV tech, not how it was ten years ago. The grid can handle things at the pace we are adopting EVs, most people that claim it can't handle it envision this world where tomorrow all cars transform into EVs and charge at the same time. The reality is most EV charging is overnight when grid demand is lower, but when they do their comparison they always bring up middle of the day, ACs blasting in e very home. It's all FUD meant to make people dismiss the tech so they can keep pumping out dino juice, regardless of consequences or limited supply.

 

It may be! Hydrogen vehicles are still EVs, they just aren't BEVs. The problem with Hydrogen, and even supporters acknowledge this, is you spend electricity to compress and refuel, and it's a lot of energy, then there is a reaction to convert back to electricity, and the performance result isn't there compared to EVs. Plus it's far more difficult to install hydrogen refuel stations than set up EV recharge stations, and beyond that, it's MUCH more difficult, last I heard, to get a home hydrogen refuel station. So one advantage of BEVs is the ability to start every day full, but that may not be possible with hydrogen.

The hydrogen refueling though, man is that better. Hopefully we can get there with BEVs. They have talked about things similar to hydrogen refueling for BEVs, like the ability to swap out the... man I am blanking on it, but essentially the charged liquid portion so you could "refuel" a BEV quicker.

 

Nothing emotional about any of the shortcomings of EVs with current battery technology. It simply can not do everything a gas or diesel vehicle can do visa vis refueling time or availability of refueling facilities, not to mention range, which I challenge anyone to find a EV with 700 miles of range like my 36 gallon tank F150 has. It's called Energy Density. ICE vehicles have it. EVs not so much. If you wish to worship at the alter of EV, that is more of an emotional choice than a logical one.

 

Exactly, what I dont understand is, if this is so important, why not just go ahead and create the constantly self power generating vehicle? All that is happening here, is switching who makes the money! IMO

 

Follow the money. That works when investigating any criminal organization, as is most apropos when the "green energy" mafia is involved.

 

Thanks for explaining. what about this?

 

No one has stated there aren’t short comings with the current battery tech, and no one said EVs were at the point now to replace all gas vehicles. Everyone acknowledges the short range might not work for everyone (I am one of those people it won’t currently work for) so stop trying to compare it as apples to apples. We all know it isn’t there yet. Maybe it never will be. But it has its place. Not everyone needs a diesel to pull a trailer either, so guess what, not everyone buys a diesel.

 

Exactly. The fossil fuel shills have to denigrate BEV's because they see the writing on the wall.

I don't live in a particularly progressive state, (Nevada) there are no rebates for electric vehicles here. But I could get juice for a BEV at $.05/ KWh, today. Yes, 5 pennies a KWh. And our normal homeowner rate is $.11/KWh, 24/7, if you don't like the 5 ¢ rate.




I don't know how NV Energy does it, could it be because they get 30% of their power from renewable sources, with a goal of 100%? Are we the only State in the USA that offers this?