New electric Ram

[tron67j]

Do you really think that an EV is dirtier than a vehicle that uses fossil fuels? Are you taking into account the exploration, extraction, transportation, refinement, more transportation, and burning of fossil fuels? then of course this is a cycle that repeats itself for EVERY barrel of oil hundreds of thousands of times.
EV batteries are recyclable, and potentially have many uses plus they last for 100s of thousands of miles as a real.
Only some power is generated by coal and that number is dropping every day.

The percentage of world power produced by coal (37%) remains the largest over all others including natural gas (24%) and renewables (26%). Renewables have finally started to show a slow rise (percentage was about 22% back at the beginning of the 1970s) and coal shows the same small march down, but it could take decades before coal is supplanted as the number 1 fuel source for energy generation. I do agree with you, it would be better to not spew noxious fumes into the air. I would live to try solar at the house. But we have too many trees and the generation is too inefficient right now for the limited panel number we could use (I continue to monitor this number with a solar engineer, and still doesn't work even with latest advances). But I did install geothermal for heating and cooling, replacing fuel oil and saw a 20% reduction in energy use to generate heating and cooling when comparing energy value if oil versus electric. And, I get hot water for showers, etc. as a byproduct of the process through a desuperheater that captures the heat in a dedicated tank.

 

[mcarey]

The percentage of world power produced by coal (37%) remains the largest over all others including natural gas (24%) and renewables (26%). Renewables have finally started to show a slow rise (percentage was about 22% back at the beginning of the 1970s) and coal shows the same small march down, but it could take decades before coal is supplanted as the number 1 fuel source for energy generation. I do agree with you, it would be better to not spew noxious fumes into the air. I would live to try solar at the house. But we have too many trees and the generation is too inefficient right now for the limited panel number we could use (I continue to monitor this number with a solar engineer, and still doesn't work even with latest advances). But I did install geothermal for heating and cooling, replacing fuel oil and saw a 20% reduction in energy use to generate heating and cooling when comparing energy value if oil versus electric. And, I get hot water for showers, etc. as a byproduct of the process through a desuperheater that captures the heat in a dedicated tank.

Solar is definitely a tricky one. Here in UT, it would be great. WA, not so much. Location is definitely a big component, which makes things difficult because it immediately falls into a "not for everyone" gap.

Where I do think solar would/could shine would be if there was a mass adaption of it, like on every roof, but the collection wasn't exactly for personal use and was split amongst everyone. I know the concept of sharing and helping others is now such a crazy concept that it is even often considered a political take, but I do think we could see a decent result this way with sheer volume. That said, I also recognize that there would be far too many people against panels on their roofs, against sharing "their" electricity, and against whoever attempted to put a plan/program together to accomplish something like this. It really likely would be impossible.

They also do look kinda silly.

 

[Evguy1]

Sort of like trying to reduce emission, we all breath the same air but "no one is going to tell me to reduce my emission, let those tree huggers do it". This is a generalization about the world and not specific to any political party or members. ;>)

 

[cellguru]

The percentage of world power produced by coal (37%) remains the largest over all others including natural gas (24%) and renewables (26%). Renewables have finally started to show a slow rise (percentage was about 22% back at the beginning of the 1970s) and coal shows the same small march down, but it could take decades before coal is supplanted as the number 1 fuel source for energy generation. I do agree with you, it would be better to not spew noxious fumes into the air. I would live to try solar at the house. But we have too many trees and the generation is too inefficient right now for the limited panel number we could use (I continue to monitor this number with a solar engineer, and still doesn't work even with latest advances). But I did install geothermal for heating and cooling, replacing fuel oil and saw a 20% reduction in energy use to generate heating and cooling when comparing energy value if oil versus electric. And, I get hot water for showers, etc. as a byproduct of the process through a desuperheater that captures the heat in a dedicated tank.

Indeed I believe in the USA we get 60% of our electricity from fossil fuels, so my EV will be powered 20% by coal and 40% natural gas. I plan on keeping the RAM for longer trips, but will run the Teletubby around the valleys here in Utah where we get horrible winter inversions, photo attached!

The fossil fuels for the most part are being burned elsewhere!

 

[tron67j]

Indeed I believe in the USA we get 60% of our electricity from fossil fuels, so my EV will be powered 20% by coal and 40% natural gas. I plan on keeping the RAM for longer trips, but will run the Teletubby around the valleys here in Utah where we get horrible winter inversions, photo attached!

The fossil fuels for the most part are being burned elsewhere! View attachment 484926

Haha, teletubby! I remember that same look when I visited Fort Collins in CO and one day driving down to Denver. I thought there was a forest fire.

 

[mcarey]

I plan on keeping the RAM for longer trips, but will run the Teletubby around the valleys here in Utah where we get horrible winter inversions, photo attached!

Ha, I know this view all too well. At least today is only a Moderate AQ day.

Edit: Wanted to add, I think this is also a component in the desire (or lack thereof) to shift towards more environmentally friendly options. Us here in UT get to witness the reality of bad air pollution first hand, while people in other locations quite literally never truly experience it. It's a hell of a lot easier to not really care about something, when you're not really dealing with it all that much in the first place. Case in point, coastal flooding isn't much of a first-hand issue in my life but in turn I recognize that trying to slow down global warming and the subsequent rising sea levels is probably a worthy endeavor.

 

[mikeru]

Solar is definitely a tricky one. Here in UT, it would be great. WA, not so much. Location is definitely a big component, which makes things difficult because it immediately falls into a "not for everyone" gap.

Where I do think solar would/could shine would be if there was a mass adaption of it, like on every roof, but the collection wasn't exactly for personal use and was split amongst everyone. I know the concept of sharing and helping others is now such a crazy concept that it is even often considered a political take, but I do think we could see a decent result this way with sheer volume. That said, I also recognize that there would be far too many people against panels on their roofs, against sharing "their" electricity, and against whoever attempted to put a plan/program together to accomplish something like this. It really likely would be impossible.

They also do look kinda silly.

Definitely true that location matters for solar. Even in WA it matters. I live in Eastern WA. In an area which is considered a high desert. We don't get a ton of precipitation except in winter and early spring. We can go weeks or months at a time with little or no precipitation. Early June thru mid-October would be excellent for solar. Some years would be better, some worse. But you can reliably count on at least 5 months of good sunshine. For the rest of the year I'd depend on the power company though.

To address what you said about sharing and helping others, since that comment seems to have been aimed at least partially in my direction. I just want to be clear, I have no problem sharing and helping others. In fact I do share with friends, family, and neighbors. I stop to help if I see someone broke down on the side of the road. I donate to charities and local law enforcement. I'm not as willing to help people who refuse to hels themselves though. And I do have a problem with being forced to share. Being told that I have to give away something I've earned from my own efforts, potentially to someone who doesn't do anything to improve their own conditions. I'm just not willing to do that. But don't confuse those people with those who aren't able to improve their lives through no fault of their own. That's a different story. I work hard for what I have. I don't feel it's anyone's right to tell me what I must do with what I consider to be mine. If I installed solar panels at my expense, I'd be willing to sell any surplus energy back to the power company. But I wouldn't be okay with power being pulled from my system without being compensated for it. Now, if someone were to want to install solar panels on my property at their expense, I'd be happy to donate any surplus power above what I might use. But I would still expect to benefit from using the power generated by those panels, since they're on my property. I hope you can see the difference.

 

[mcarey]

Definitely true that location matters for solar. Even in WA it matters. I live in Eastern WA. In an area which is considered a high desert. We don't get a ton of precipitation except in winter and early spring. We can go weeks or months at a time with little or no precipitation. Early June thru mid-October would be excellent for solar. Some years would be better, some worse. But you can reliably count on at least 5 months of good sunshine. For the rest of the year I'd depend on the power company though.

To address what you said about sharing and helping others, since that comment seems to have been aimed at least partially in my direction. I just want to be clear, I have no problem sharing and helping others. In fact I do share with friends, family, and neighbors. I stop to help if I see someone broke down on the side of the road. I donate to charities and local law enforcement. I'm not as willing to help people who refuse to hels themselves though. And I do have a problem with being forced to share. Being told that I have to give away something I've earned from my own efforts, potentially to someone who doesn't do anything to improve their own conditions. I'm just not willing to do that. But don't confuse those people with those who aren't able to improve their lives through no fault of their own. That's a different story. I work hard for what I have. I don't feel it's anyone's right to tell me what I must do with what I consider to be mine. If I installed solar panels at my expense, I'd be willing to sell any surplus energy back to the power company. But I wouldn't be okay with power being pulled from my system without being compensated for it. Now, if someone were to want to install solar panels on my property at their expense, I'd be happy to donate any surplus power above what I might use. But I would still expect to benefit from using the power generated by those panels, since they're on my property. I hope you can see the difference.

I don't think it was pointed at you, but you may have posted something relevant. I don't remember. Apologies if you felt that way though, as I was definitely just speaking in general earlier when I wrote that.

And yeah, I agree with not just giving away stuff you've paid for. We're not all charities. I was thinking more along the lines of some kind of government sponsored plan where everyone gets solar panels or something like that. To be frank, I didn't really think too hard on the logistics of the idea at all. Was more of just a high level thought that if we all had solar panels, and we all contributed to the grid, it would likely help everyone - including those who may not be able to generate or contribute as much. Ya know.. a "one nation" kind of effort.

At the end of the day, we all have roofs that are likely currently doing nothing more than soaking up rays of sunlight and causing our HVAC systems to work a bit harder.

 

[1shadowsabre]

The percentage of world power produced by coal (37%) remains the largest over all others including natural gas (24%) and renewables (26%). Renewables have finally started to show a slow rise (percentage was about 22% back at the beginning of the 1970s) and coal shows the same small march down, but it could take decades before coal is supplanted as the number 1 fuel source for energy generation. I do agree with you, it would be better to not spew noxious fumes into the air. I would live to try solar at the house. But we have too many trees and the generation is too inefficient right now for the limited panel number we could use (I continue to monitor this number with a solar engineer, and still doesn't work even with latest advances). But I did install geothermal for heating and cooling, replacing fuel oil and saw a 20% reduction in energy use to generate heating and cooling when comparing energy value if oil versus electric. And, I get hot water for showers, etc. as a byproduct of the process through a desuperheater that captures the heat in a dedicated tank.

All great points and I too have looked at solar but can't make it add up. Too much rain is WA.and too many trees around my place. I did install a variable speed heat pump and my local utility informs me that I am in the top 5% of comparable homes in my neighborhood for energy efficiency.
I also have an EV that we charge at home however most of our long range driving is towing a camper, love the RAM for that.
Cant beat the Tesla for the day to day grind and commute though. 2 different cars, 2 different functions!

 

[Sking80]

Not the biggest fan of electric trucks or automation trucks

 

[2012RAM1500RT]

I agree with most of this although most of us "car guys" surround ourselves with like minded people and our kids tend to follow in our steps. What I don't understand and here is where my personal likes takes over is HOW THE HELL HAS THIS THING GOT 1.25 MILLION PRE ORDERS!!! View attachment 484787

1.25 million blind people with 1 push button on their keyboard that says "order"? LOL

 

[Docwagon1776]

I agree with most of this although most of us "car guys" surround ourselves with like minded people and our kids tend to follow in our steps. What I don't understand and here is where my personal likes takes over is HOW THE HELL HAS THIS THING GOT 1.25 MILLION PRE ORDERS!!! View attachment 484787

Looks like the Atari 2600 "Moon Patrol" vehicle.

 

[tron67j]

Well, Musk announced this week that a) no new vehicles coming in 2022, so the truck would not be released until next year at earliest, and 2) he now seems to be saying it can't be made at a cost that would facilitate the sales volume required to make it viable.

It's easy to plunk $100 on a preorder, but with no way to actually touch it and figure out if it even would function for most people, those preorders wouldn't all turn into orders. For me, the rear doors look ridiculous to try and use, seem like huge blindspots in each side (yeah, I know, cameras (ugh), and who knows how actually functional the bed night be. Not interested in such styling.

 

[mcarey]

Well, Musk announced this week that a) no new vehicles coming in 2022, so the truck would not be released until next year at earliest, and 2) he now seems to be saying it can't be made at a cost that would facilitate the sales volume required to make it viable.

It's easy to plunk $100 on a preorder, but with no way to actually touch it and figure out if it even would function for most people, those preorders wouldn't all turn into orders. For me, the rear doors look ridiculous to try and use, seem like huge blindspots in each side (yeah, I know, cameras (ugh), and who knows how actually functional the bed night be. Not interested in such styling.

I think my biggest issue is that the body is supposed to be a single bended piece of steel. Cool in theory, till you cannot replace a panel.

 

[tron67j]

I think my biggest issue is that the body is supposed to be a single bended piece of steel. Cool in theory, till you cannot replace a panel.

Exactly, not repair friendly at all. Great point.

 

[GTyankee]

California may be different that other States

The plan is EVs will be charged by the mileage, they are quite heavy, so it will be 2 to 4 cents per mile

If a home owner has Solar Panels, the electric company is losing money, so the are charging higher fees to be connected to the grid

Also something that irritates me, the companies that own the Solar & Wind Farms, have been sending excess power to other States, rather than give Californians a price break, at times those same companies are giving that excess power to another State & not charging them for it.
........................................................................

Now for questions:

If you do have a EV, does it take 115 AC, 230 AC, or 440 AC to charge your vehicle ?

Which is cheaper to use ?

=====================================
Someone could do a study
Based on driving 10 hours per day

What would it cost to drive 3,000 miles ?
Both vehicles being the same size

Following traffic signs & Lights

1 vehicle being powered by fossil fuel
the other being an EV

you must include motel stays that don't have charging stations

I think with all the stops for on the highway charging
The EV would spend an extra night or 2 at motels making the trip

 

[mcarey]

Now for questions:

If you do have a EV, does it take 115 AC, 230 AC, or 440 AC to charge your vehicle ?

Which is cheaper to use ?

=====================================
Someone could do a study
Based on driving 10 hours per day

What would it cost to drive 3,000 miles ?
Both vehicles being the same size

Following traffic signs & Lights

1 vehicle being powered by fossil fuel
the other being an EV

you must include motel stays that don't have charging stations

I think with all the stops for on the highway charging
The EV would spend an extra night or 2 at motels making the trip

For question one, I'm pretty sure you can use any of them. And since you're billed on the actual quantity of power used, it'd be nearly indifferent. Not 100% on this though.

For your second series of questions, it sounds like it'd be pretty close to equivalent really, at least at first glance. I wouldn't mind someone checking my thoughts on this as I'm far from a math ****, I'm actually a writer lol, so I could be missing something.

I decided to approach it from the perspective of total time at first glance, just to see wiggle room there would be for charging.

3000/70 = 42.85 >> 43/10 = 4.3 >> 4 days of hotels, arriving on day 5 after 3 hours.

3000 miles, going 70mph = 42.85 hours of driving. 10 hours a day, makes it 4 days (10hr segments) and 3 hours of effort based on car time alone.

That would leave 7 driving units (hours) to account for charging across the 4 day trip, before it would trigger a new day, requiring a fifth hotel stay - assuming we have to factor in the charging times as actual driving time, which IMO is a questionable decision in this whole thing.

Referencing this graphic (https://blog.carvana.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/EV_BlogInforgraphics_ChargingTime_v4.png) which was the first result in "tesla supercharger times", we can ballpark supercharging times at about 30 minutes. Note the graphic does say full charge from fully depleted, and I'd imagine that not to be the case in the event of a cross country drive but who cares. This is quick and dirty.

Model S gets a touch over 400 miles per charge, and we're driving 700 miles a day (70mph x 10hrs), so with charging 2x a day we'll effectively lose an hour per day of driving - though likely a bit less because we wouldn't be charging 0 - 100.

But again, quick and dirty number run here. That would put you at 8 hours of charging times, theoretically adding a new hotel stay, by 1 hour. If we were to get a bit wild, knocking off 7.5 minutes from each charge is all it would take to erase that hour, which I have no clue would be feasible or not. And in the real world I'd imagine 99% of us would just push that final hour to get to the destination.

Ballpark costs:

Model S cost and weight theoretically aligns it pretty close with a BMW 7 series. BMW 7 series gets 22/29mpg, I'm going to use 25mpg as the average for math sake. This may be upsetting to some, or not, I don't know or care really. I don't think it's fair to align it with a 40mpg civic that weighs 1500lbs less, and someone else can do this if they feel so inclined.


ICE:
fuel= 3000 miles @ 25mpg = 120 gallons of gas @ $3.4 (https://gasprices.aaa.com/) is $408 in fuel.
hotel x 4 = $400
total = $808

EV:
charging = 100 kWh battery pack, at $0.25kWh supercharging rate = $25 for 0-100 charge. 8 charges = $200 (I'd suggest this approximately 1 $25 charge too high, since we were using approximately 7/8 of a charge per day, but again who cares)
hotel x 4 = $400
total = $600, or $700 if you needed that extra night. Or $800 if you felt like really relaxing while still saving $8

---
(Feel free to check these numbers. There is a great chance I messed up somewheres. I did all of this on the fly while writing this out, so it's definitely possible and you wouldn't be offending me)

 

[Evguy1]

Wow, you are a good writer. ;>)
That all looks like it makes sense and is relevant for someone who makes a lot of road trips. Where an EV shines at this point and time is for the daily commute where its charged at home at a much cheaper rate. As far as I know ALL EV's come with or can charge from a level one charging unit witch just plugs into a standard 115V AC outlet. All level two charging stations work on 220V AC. The big level 3 (fast chargers) stations are DC output and not sure what the AC input is. Here is a cross country trip in an EV that was done last summer.
A Vancouver man says he has set a record for the fastest drive of the entire Trans Canada Highway in an electric car. Harvey Soicher, 68, and co-driver Kent Rathwell took the 7,000 kilometre-plus journey from St. John's to Victoria in four days and 19 hours, which included taking ferries and charging up his vehicle.

 

[mcarey]

Wow, you are a good writer. ;>)
That all looks like it makes sense and is relevant for someone who makes a lot of road trips. Where an EV shines at this point and time is for the daily commute where its charged at home at a much cheaper rate. As far as I know ALL EV's come with or can charge from a level one charging unit witch just plugs into a standard 115V AC outlet. All level two charging stations work on 220V AC. The big level 3 (fast chargers) stations are DC output and not sure what the AC input is. Here is a cross country trip in an EV that was done last summer.
A Vancouver man says he has set a record for the fastest drive of the entire Trans Canada Highway in an electric car. Harvey Soicher, 68, and co-driver Kent Rathwell took the 7,000 kilometre-plus journey from St. John's to Victoria in four days and 19 hours, which included taking ferries and charging up his vehicle.

Ha thanks. It was a fun way to burn through my morning cup of coffee. Looking back, it actually appears that it'd only be a ~45 minute difference since I rounded up, which I'd think would likely get covered (or minimized to literal minutes by the end of the 4 days) by the gaps in not having to charge from 0-100 every charging period; but we're really splitting hairs at this point. End of the day, on this cannonball run scenario I think you'd arrive on the same day most of the time, almost undoubtedly. Albeit, a handful of hours later than the ICE car. Being able to charge at night at the hotels would also tighten things up even more, and really isn't an unreasonable aspect in the comparison but either way, I was somewhat surprised with just how close it was time wise.

I do agree with you too. A 3000 mile drive is really not the ideal scenario for EVs in the current state, though obviously not impossible and definitely more affordable compared to ICE vehicles assuming you can hit chargers reasonably. Commuting and putting around locally however is where one would really benefit from ownership. Especially on the cost side.

And, the idea of doing a 3000 mile hell-run across the country would never be on my radar. I'd just fly.

 

[Socalramfan]

For question one, I'm pretty sure you can use any of them. And since you're billed on the actual quantity of power used, it'd be nearly indifferent. Not 100% on this though.

For your second series of questions, it sounds like it'd be pretty close to equivalent really, at least at first glance. I wouldn't mind someone checking my thoughts on this as I'm far from a math ****, I'm actually a writer lol, so I could be missing something.

I decided to approach it from the perspective of total time at first glance, just to see wiggle room there would be for charging.

3000/70 = 42.85 >> 43/10 = 4.3 >> 4 days of hotels, arriving on day 5 after 3 hours.

3000 miles, going 70mph = 42.85 hours of driving. 10 hours a day, makes it 4 days (10hr segments) and 3 hours of effort based on car time alone.

That would leave 7 driving units (hours) to account for charging across the 4 day trip, before it would trigger a new day, requiring a fifth hotel stay - assuming we have to factor in the charging times as actual driving time, which IMO is a questionable decision in this whole thing.

Referencing this graphic (https://blog.carvana.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/EV_BlogInforgraphics_ChargingTime_v4.png) which was the first result in "tesla supercharger times", we can ballpark supercharging times at about 30 minutes. Note the graphic does say full charge from fully depleted, and I'd imagine that not to be the case in the event of a cross country drive but who cares. This is quick and dirty.

Model S gets a touch over 400 miles per charge, and we're driving 700 miles a day (70mph x 10hrs), so with charging 2x a day we'll effectively lose an hour per day of driving - though likely a bit less because we wouldn't be charging 0 - 100.

But again, quick and dirty number run here. That would put you at 8 hours of charging times, theoretically adding a new hotel stay, by 1 hour. If we were to get a bit wild, knocking off 7.5 minutes from each charge is all it would take to erase that hour, which I have no clue would be feasible or not. And in the real world I'd imagine 99% of us would just push that final hour to get to the destination.

Ballpark costs:

Model S cost and weight theoretically aligns it pretty close with a BMW 7 series. BMW 7 series gets 22/29mpg, I'm going to use 25mpg as the average for math sake. This may be upsetting to some, or not, I don't know or care really. I don't think it's fair to align it with a 40mpg civic that weighs 1500lbs less, and someone else can do this if they feel so inclined.


ICE:
fuel= 3000 miles @ 25mpg = 120 gallons of gas @ $3.4 (https://gasprices.aaa.com/) is $408 in fuel.
hotel x 4 = $400
total = $808

EV:
charging = 100 kWh battery pack, at $0.25kWh supercharging rate = $25 for 0-100 charge. 8 charges = $200 (I'd suggest this approximately 1 $25 charge too high, since we were using approximately 7/8 of a charge per day, but again who cares)
hotel x 4 = $400
total = $600, or $700 if you needed that extra night. Or $800 if you felt like really relaxing while still saving $8

---
(Feel free to check these numbers. There is a great chance I messed up somewheres. I did all of this on the fly while writing this out, so it's definitely possible and you wouldn't be offending me)

Good write up.

$8....... toss in a Starbucks with tip and you break even.

There is an intangible here on the thread that is being overlooked....... and that’s the joy and passion from driving a gas / diesel . Aka: Smiles per miles.

Cant tell you how many times my neighbors, and other drivers give me that look of “..... Whoaaaaa, now that’s a truck”, and I always get out with a big smile.

Compared to the “I’m constipated, and I can’t find my balls anymore”.....

I’d call that priceless and well worth any difference in cost