daveo4porsche

so many facts wrong here - don’t know where to start

daveo4porsche

it is what is is

again what’s your point?

yrralis1

Its 5393 pounds . Thats almost 1000 pounds . The odd wheels and special tires along with reduced drag are all aimed at getting those range numbers . Think of moving a brick through air . Thats what it faces .

yrralis1

I agree. Most the materials science of electric cars pose challenges . and solving the pitfalls of them are chemical and electrical.
Even though they are popular in legislative circles they do fail to understand what needs to be accomplished is sometimes impossible.

yrralis1

Well there is a minority who feels like you so my posting here made me the minority but it came with just a basic question . The answer to its weight involves every aspect about the car .
I think you guys know that and it bothers you to hear it . Just saying
"it was debunked" or "look at the Taycan" doesnt do much for me . I pointed at what it takes to manage that weight . heck you can see it in the car and design itself . I am not saying its all bad but its not perfect by any means at the price they are asking it should be.

daveo4porsche

I think the point was the Model Y is about the same weight as the current Macan ICE

Airbag997

Where in this video does it discuss energy efficiency? All I see C02 byproduct emissions between technologies, which feeds plants and it is good for the world...thus strengthening my argument.

michaelp

Coefficient of drag on the Macan EV is 0.25 (Model 3 - 0.23, Model X - 0.25, Audi E-Tron - 0.28, etc)

Rough estimate on a brick 0.8 to 1.2 (depending on the surface material, etc)

ICE Macan 0.34 to 0.37 depending on trim and year

Airbag997

This is an excellent counter argument. Thanks for joining the discussion.

Airbag997

"When you buy a $TSLA , you’re buying an appreciating asset”. “It’s financially insane to buy anything other than a Tesla”-Elon Musk 2019...

stanwyk

1. I’ve never listened to Elon Musk and thought “that’s genius!”
2. I’ve never purchased a daily driver SUV and thought it was going to appreciate in value.

Needsdecaf

So you're saying more CO2 emissions is better for the planet?

michaelp

This argument contains several misconceptions and inaccuracies:

1. Efficiency of EVs vs. ICE Vehicles: While it's true that ICE vehicles typically have lower efficiency (25-40%) compared to EVs (65-85%), the claim that when factoring in electricity generation and transmission, the efficiency becomes comparable is misleading. Even when accounting for losses in electricity generation and transmission, EVs are generally more energy-efficient than ICE vehicles. Numerous studies have shown that EVs produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions over their lifecycle compared to traditional internal combustion engine vehicles.

2. Energy Consumption in Battery Production: The claim that battery production consumes a vast amount of energy equivalent to 2,675 gallons of diesel per battery for a BEV is exaggerated. While it's true that manufacturing batteries requires energy and resources, advancements in battery technology and production methods are continuously improving efficiency and reducing environmental impact. Additionally, the energy used in battery production is often offset by the fuel savings and emissions reductions achieved during the vehicle's operational life.

3. Finite Material Resource Utilization: While it's true that batteries require certain materials like lithium, cobalt, and nickel, the argument overlooks the fact that these resources are also used in the production of traditional vehicles, albeit in different forms. Moreover, efforts are underway to develop alternative battery chemistries that rely less on rare or environmentally sensitive materials.

4. Manufacturers' Approach to EVs: The claim that manufacturers are shunning EVs and losing billions is not entirely accurate. Many major automakers are heavily investing in electric vehicle development and production, recognizing the growing demand for clean transportation and the regulatory trends favoring EVs. While hybrid vehicles remain a transitional technology, the long-term trend is towards electrification.

In summary, while there are challenges associated with the adoption of electric vehicles, such as energy consumption in battery production and reliance on specific raw materials, the assertion that EVs are "asinine economically and technically" and will go down as the worst strategic decision in modern human history is unfounded. The transition to electric vehicles is a complex process that requires careful consideration of various factors, but it also holds significant promise for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving air quality, and enhancing energy security.

Needsdecaf

This is completely irrelevant to the argument. Elon is a moron and anyone who believed that line of BS deserves what they got.

Airbag997

Yes. 100%. This is objectively empirical. Earth greener and more abundant than ever before in modern human history. C02 is not a major greenhouse gas. It accounts for 0.04% of the atmosphere. There is a mathematical equation for explaining this, it's called the Schwarzschild equation. And it accurately demonstrates C02 is and has been saturated in the atmosphere for quite some time, and has no meaningful impact on global temperature. Even if C02 doubled, it would have no meaningful impact on global temperature.

You know what does effect global temperature, the sun (Milankovitch cycles, solar activity) and water vapor, AKA clouds. All major contributors to global temperature. Ivar Giaever (Nobel Laureate), Judith Curry, Freeman Dyson, Jordan Peterson etc all have good info on this. Unlike the NOAA who manipulates the data and models to fit an AGW narrative that is pure conjecture.