Where is the Tesla Semi?

[radar]

Originally Posted by move on

Nobody wants technology to fail. People just don't want a technology to be forced upon them through taxpayer subsidies based on false science. If EVs are ever going to go mainstream they will have to stand on their own. Let's see if that works.

Well, so far so good. Tesla’s in our province outsell every other EV 4 times over, and most models get no subsidy. Screw science, people buy them because they are crazy fast, super convenient and are cheaper than their equivalent in performance gas counterparts. And that’s why they are willing to wait 3 to 8 months to get one. Science doesn’t impress many here, but the EV driving experience does. No one is being forced to buy an EV here, it’s just what a whack of people want to drive.

[dixonge]

Originally Posted by move on

Nobody wants technology to fail. People just don't want a technology to be forced upon them through taxpayer subsidies based on false science. If EVs are ever going to go mainstream they will have to stand on their own. Let's see if that works.

How about we first 'see if that works' with fossil fuels? They've been forced on you through taxpayer subsidies for decades!

[move on]

Originally Posted by dixonge

How about we first 'see if that works' with fossil fuels? They've been forced on you through taxpayer subsidies for decades!

This is of course a myth. Oil and gas companies pay a lot more in taxes than most other industries.

[wxman]

Regarding semi technology, Argonne National Laboratory just issued a report on the total cost to own (TCO) of various vehicle technologies (https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/05/167399.pdf). According to that report, conventional diesel semis have the lowest TCO ($1.03/mile; $1.01/mile for diesel hybrid), while BEV semis TCO run about $1.38/mile (page 112 of report). The battery is estimated to be >1400 kWh for the BEV semi.

Another recent report by Ricardo, a UK engineering firm ("Determining the environmental impacts of conventional and alternatively fuelled vehicles through LCA"), calculates the unladen mass of BEV 40-tonne "Articulated Lorries" to be 20,943 kg, while a conventional diesel semi is 14,469 kg, almost 6,500 kg more tare weight for the BEV semi (page 120).

Regarding climate change, California has offset far more GHG emissions with renewable diesel and biodiesel (FAME) than with electricity, even with the relatively clean electric grid in California (https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/cleaner-...ow-carbon-fuel).

[F4Gary]

Originally Posted by radar

Well, so far so good. Tesla’s in our province outsell every other EV 4 times over, and most models get no subsidy. Screw science, people buy them because they are crazy fast, super convenient and are cheaper than their equivalent in performance gas counterparts. And that’s why they are willing to wait 3 to 8 months to get one. Science doesn’t impress many here, but the EV driving experience does. No one is being forced to buy an EV here, it’s just what a whack of people want to drive.

Not all are happy in Cali...


1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, research shows



https://www.businessinsider.com/elec...e-study-2021-4

[radar]

Originally Posted by F4Gary

Not all are happy in Cali...


1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, research shows



https://www.businessinsider.com/elec...e-study-2021-4

Absolutely. We have lots of folks come to us and ask us about EV ownership. The first thing we ask them is “where are you going to charge it”. If they live in an apartment that doesn’t have charging facilities we always recommend sorting that out first. If they don’t they’ll be one of those 5. But it’s getting easier here. More and more buildings are getting modified and there is now building code requirements for charging facilities. All the new apartments here have charging facilities. Relying on public charging facilities for charging is a recipe for frustration. If you have it where you live it is considerably more convenient and cheaper than gas car ownership.

[mike5511]

At Fantasy World.

[jharrell]

Originally Posted by move on

A combined cycle natural gas plant can achieve 60% thermal efficiency, but that's only when it's running at full load. In practice it does less. Throw a coal plant onto the grid and that brings the efficiency down even more. Then there's the 10% line loss. The average electric grid is around 35% at the user level. Compare that to 40% for a semi's diesel engine that most of the time is running at a favorable RPM and load on the interstate. Now, deduct the heat energy lost by the electric motors, battery and inverters. Then add in the CO2 from battery production and you can begin to see how preposterous it gets. Note also, there are technological initiatives under way that are targeting diesel efficiencies of over 50%. Same for gasoline engines.

Where are you getting those grid loss numbers from? Most well to wheel analysis shows BEV's better than diesel in CO2 emissions with the current mix.

[move on]

Originally Posted by jharrell

Where are you getting those grid loss numbers from? Most well to wheel analysis shows BEV's better than diesel in CO2 emissions with the current mix.

Attachment 332611

Attachment 332612

They are comparing the best possible EV with the worst possible gasoline car. You have to take these studies with a grain of salt. In this case the authors seem to come with a certain amount of bias towards EVs. But if you take that 1953 Ford out of the graphic and put in a modern diesel semi at highway speeds you'll see that the diesel is better.

I do like the graphic, though. It's a good way to look at the situation.

[jharrell]

Originally Posted by move on

They are comparing the best possible EV with the worst possible gasoline car. You have to take these studies with a grain of salt. In this case the authors seem to come with a certain amount of bias towards EVs. But if you take that 1953 Ford out of the graphic and put in a modern diesel semi at highway speeds you'll see that the diesel is better.

I do like the graphic, though. It's a good way to look at the situation.

Thats fine, its just from MIT, show me something better. Power plants are more thermally efficient than diesel engines due to multiple levels of heat recovery, also they can put as much emission control as needed without concern for weight or space unlike a road vehicle and have teams of people maintaining them.

Current diesels are maybe 40% thermally efficient max while a power plant is up around 50%, the fuel power plants run off of need less refinement than diesel and of course you need to account for transporting the fuel to the gas stations.

Freightliner has tried adding secondary heat recovery turbines like a power plant to their experimental super truck to bring the diesels efficiency up to 50% but at great cost and complexity, might be viable with more work.

Grid losses are around 5% based on any info I can find, please point me to something showing 10-35% losses.

Any nuclear, hydro, solar, or wind plant that comes online reduces CO2 emissions without any changes to the vehicle.

All info I can find show BEV's on par or better than diesel for emissions, main barriers are cost and weight, both are coming down year over year, especially cost.

[move on]

Originally Posted by jharrell

Thats fine, its just from MIT, show me something better. Power plants are more thermally efficient than diesel engines due to multiple levels of heat recovery, also they can put as much emission control as needed without concern for weight or space unlike a road vehicle and have teams of people maintaining them.

Current diesels are maybe 40% thermally efficient max while a power plant is up around 50%, the fuel power plants run off of need less refinement than diesel and of course you need to account for transporting the fuel to the gas stations.

Freightliner has tried adding secondary heat recovery turbines like a power plant to their experimental super truck to bring the diesels efficiency up to 50% but at great cost and complexity, might be viable with more work.

Grid losses are around 5% based on any info I can find, please point me to something showing 10-35% losses.

Any nuclear, hydro, solar, or wind plant that comes online reduces CO2 emissions without any changes to the vehicle.

All info I can find show BEV's on par or better than diesel for emissions, main barriers are cost and weight, both are coming down year over year, especially cost.

I just read a report on California's actual natural gas generation efficiency. It came to 44% before grid losses, so the diesel looks pretty good if you can get it to 40% (there are technologies on the horizon to get it to 50%). The main problem with EV semis, though, is that the battery weight eats into the cargo weight and you have to use more trucks to move the same amount of freight.

Concerning CO2, I think this is complete nonsense, but even if you don't think that and are worried about global warming you still have to consider the CO2 released using a life cycle assessment, including raw material mining and refining, manufacturing, vehicle operation and disposal. One LCA study says you have to drive an EV 120,000 miles before it releases less CO2 than an ICE. OK, some other studies show less, but the EV is still going to cost 40% more than the ICE car, making the BEV look not very practical.

[radar]

Originally Posted by move on

I just read a report on California's actual natural gas generation efficiency. It came to 44% before grid losses, so the diesel looks pretty good if you can get it to 40% (there are technologies on the horizon to get it to 50%). The main problem with EV semis, though, is that the battery weight eats into the cargo weight and you have to use more trucks to move the same amount of freight.

Concerning CO2, I think this is complete nonsense, but even if you don't think that and are worried about global warming you still have to consider the CO2 released using a life cycle assessment, including raw material mining and refining, manufacturing, vehicle operation and disposal. One LCA study says you have to drive an EV 120,000 miles before it releases less CO2 than an ICE. OK, some other studies show less, but the EV is still going to cost 40% more than the ICE car, making the BEV look not very practical.

40 percent more? Nope. Most EV's sold today are sold in the high performance premium market. In that market they are not 40 percent more, they are not 20 percent more, they are not even more. The only way an equivalent priced BMW, Audi or Mercedes could keep up to my wifes Tesla is if it was on the end of a rope being hauled behind her Tesla.

But if you are talking about Chevy Bolts or Nissan Leafs or whatever, sure, they are pricier than their gas equivalents although again without the performance or convenience of an EV. But they still make up a small portion of the market. As that class of EV's get cheaper they will start to eat into that market as well. People do actually put a price on running costs, performance and convenience.

[jharrell]

Originally Posted by move on

I just read a report on California's actual natural gas generation efficiency. It came to 44% before grid losses, so the diesel looks pretty good if you can get it to 40% (there are technologies on the horizon to get it to 50%). The main problem with EV semis, though, is that the battery weight eats into the cargo weight and you have to use more trucks to move the same amount of freight.

Concerning CO2, I think this is complete nonsense, but even if you don't think that and are worried about global warming you still have to consider the CO2 released using a life cycle assessment, including raw material mining and refining, manufacturing, vehicle operation and disposal. One LCA study says you have to drive an EV 120,000 miles before it releases less CO2 than an ICE. OK, some other studies show less, but the EV is still going to cost 40% more than the ICE car, making the BEV look not very practical.

Batteries are heavier than diesel fuel, electric motors are lighter than diesel engines. Batteries can be used as vehicle structure reducing weight used elsewhere, hence the talk of structural batteries from Musk and others. Currently yes BEV weigh more for less range, but YoY wh/kg is going up at a pretty steady pace for lithium batteries. It will be interesting to see the final weight on the Tesla Semi when it finally comes out, if ever, I would imagine they are doing anything they can to shave weight on the rest of the chassis.

As far as CO2 we have solved most other emissions such as CO and NOx but perfect hydrocarbon combustion results in water and CO2. Enough CO2 will raise there earths temperature, this is a fact all you have to do is look at Venus for a worst case hellscape of a runaway CO2 greenhouse effect.

Will we get there, probably not, but we are throwing up much more sequestered ancient carbon than is being returned in the carbon cycle, hence a rise in measured CO2 levels, hopefully there are some feedback systems on the earth to keep it in check (like ocean algae) otherwise the temps will keep going up and bad things will happen. We are gambling with it right now, the earth will survive either way, life will go on, we just might suffer for it or not be here like many other other extinct creatures. I think we have time and obviously I am not too worried driving a gas RV around, but we do need to go electric and then move to some other energy source than hydrocarbons so we can stop throwing so much carbon up in the air.

The more non carbon based energy sources we use the less will be used in the manufacture of batteries and everything else. Solar panels make solar panels along with some silicon and metal, solar panels can make batteries too. the LCA needs to account for moving to renewable energy on the grid supporting the manufacture. Lithium battery recycling will be huge its already shown to be viable to recycle them.

You can cherry pick all the LCA you want here is one showing BEV exceeding normal vehicles. Much of it has to do with where the electricity comes from to run the manufacturing. The more you reduce carbon emissions on the grid the less emitted making the batteries:

[jellison76]

There is a new development in battery construction that promises to solve most of the current problems with lithium batteries. The latest in battery development is called a Solid State Battery. The lithium internals - which is prone to heat and possible fire - is replaced with a solid material that is claimed to be significantly lighter, charge faster to a higher level and eliminate current problems with lithium. Goggle "solid state batteries" for a more complete description. bje