The nerdy guy lost me when I learned it's a hybrid. EV or nothing baby!

Of course that's the garbage 'school' and his-story taught you.

Too much kool-aide.

Maybe "I hate lithium slave pollution world-ender" fixation thread. That might be a winner.

It isn't the 'electricity' that is the problem. Electricity did not start with 'Edison' the grifter. Work out the cover-up, might help the confusion about what happened when, and by whom. Have to leave the programming behind.

More of a problem is kool-aide zombies conflating issues and getting mixed up about what harm is.

20%-30% from renewables and 70-80% fossil fuel plants that, at worst, run at 2X the efficiency of an ICE.

Sorta

https://www.sae.org/news/2018/04/toyota-unveils-more-new-gasoline-ices-with-40-thermal-efficiency

https://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-plants/72369-compare-the-efficiency-of-different-power-plants/

Lithium is mined by pumping water in the ground, it comes up, and is evaporated leaving behind the lithium. There’s no slave part involved. You’re thinking of cobalt. Perhaps you drank that zombie kool-aid before getting mixed up and conflating the two?

Interesting to see combustion of any kind has an efficiency rating of around 40%.

Am I over thinking this, or is comparing efficiency percentages kind of useless between ICE and EV’s if the ev is charged by fossil fuels? If combustion itself is around 40% efficient, wouldn’t an ev need to be 100% efficient at using the generated power to be equal to an ICE? Alternative energy sources are a no brainer, but isn’t it a net loss when charged on any other system?

I don't have any pro or anti EV agenda, I think they are interesting and I certainly would consider one if it were right for me. But I would like to learn about them and compare them to what they are replacing (ICE) with good information and not repeated questionable memes (on both sides).

Now you are starting to think. There are many aspects to just the efficiency thing alone. First of all, there are different efficiency considerations for just the EV, such as for charging, and then at the wheels. Then as you said if they are charged partially by fossil fuels, there is an efficiency loss there as well. And you have to send that electricity over long distances where there is another efficiency loss. Of course you have to truck gasoline to gas stations and that is another efficiency loss for ICE. It's not one simple thing. The information is out there, you have to search it out.

It’s something like 2.5x better even if charged from fossil. I can’t remember the number but it’s been studied to death so should be easy to Google.

I did a quick search and found some data here…. Would need to be verified.
https://driveelectriccolorado.org/myth-buster-evs-are-just-as-bad-for-the-environment-as-fossil-fuel-cars/

It’s been covered here in this thread half dozen times at least too.

This https://www.fayobserver.com/story/news/crime/2022/12/04/moore-county-power-outage-investigated-as-vandalism/69699328007/ fell quite a bit short of being apocalyptic, but was surely a very serious problem for those affected. And it's hardly an isolated incident, more like a blueprint, a small taste of what may lie ahead. Such failures can cascade across larger areas. And if you look at the San Bernardino Mountain area residents who were totally isolated by being snowed in with impassable roads, stuck in place for even just a few days, you will find this led to more than a few fatalities. Even a couple days sans electricity could do the same.

Titan, this MIT study is pretty good at covering EVs powered from a dirty grid. WV is always the stand out dirtiest grid. In West VA a hybrid is actually better - for now. Everywhere else it’s an EV. And as the grid gets cleaner it shifts heavily.

https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars

I keep mentioning that efficency would be improved if the roads were electrified, but it's hard to imagine how far off that is.

ohh wait..

I think the key is that mobile sources of emissions are not equal to point source emissions that can be heavily regulated and controlled, especially when a significant portion of the population lives near a highway or busy road.

And the key point is that it is not about what the current situation is regarding power sources, since the plan to save humanity, et al. requires BOTH electrifying everything that can be as quickly as possible (this is where you buying an EV for your next car comes in), and also switching to "green" electricity generation as soon as feasible. We need to to move where the "puck" is going to be (clean electricity powering clean EVs) and not wait for everything to be in place first.
And as noted, even with fossil-fueled electricity generation EVs are still far more efficient than ICE vehicles, lower TCO, better performance and comfort, etc. so no downside.

You got duped by some very obvious bullshit, and had it kindly explained to you. That's it, there is no more.

Well, at least the road kill will now be ready to eat.

I’ll I can hear in my head now is “fry that mother %^*+er” from Metallica.

No such thing as EV range anxiety, especially in the cold.

Deep snow on these machines the other day. Needed to dig out to get to disconnects!! 7’

EVSE Maintenance is helping build the collection.

2A85D466-E8BE-4486-86BF-6513E3547B76 (resized).jpeg

7C4BA484-FFB3-4FEC-BE64-0E67207D9A23 (resized).jpeg

C91EA209-236A-44DD-81E9-88B6BA04B794 (resized).jpeg

Might pay to go back to basics (of what was concealed) and work out what energy actually is in the first place, then come to the devastating revelation that it is literally fking Everywhere around you and always has been, you don't have to pay for it unless you choose to not do the knowledge thing; instead to rely on the make-believe that you get fed the whole life by, B-S artists . . . so that then ignorant and/or stupid can pay; as much as ever they demand. And the Restriction means is also the Polution/Scarcity means. Just the next generation of "Fossil" fuels for the zombie sect to fall for and follow, to Voluntary debt slavery and destruction of 'enemy habitat'.

All we seem to hear from is programmed wokesters with their woke-believe made up excuses and 'fakt-chequing' contrived clap trap. It really is just an embarrassing display to watch unfold, group mental(ity), but that's hu-man for ya I guess.

Ask yourself what happens about Efficiency Ratings of >100%. Regarding 'Energy converssion'. Unconventional, but the ways aren't taught so that things make sense in the clap-trap world. Wouldn't telling the truth be counterproductive to their agenda of keeping everything secret?.

Hmmmm. Yes indeed. They trained people to think about things backwards.

Don't tell me how to spend my money.

Ironically, it makes me think more into the biological world and how we count calories. It means we are off by 60% or more.

Sure, I'll address the rest...

"Did the one in Arizona kill the lady on her bike?"
Yes, however the car was trying to tell the system to emergency brake but the Uber developers TURNED OFF that feature. The autonomous software saw the biker a full 6 seconds before impact. Uber coded the software to DELAY braking as they wanted the driver to take over to flag incidents needing further review. They still were relying on the driver to react at that stage of development. That driver was watching her phone in her lap - none of the drivers were allowed to use their phones while testing the vehicles. That's also why she is being prosecuted. Volvo later did it's own tests. The emergency braking, the one the Uber developers disabled, would have prevented the crash in 17 out of 20 scenarios and the other 3 would have been at a non fatal speed.

"Did the one in Cali drive into the K barriers and kill the driver"
It did. The lanes split and the lines on the road actually drove right up to the barrier and the driver, who was playing a game on his phone, didn't notice. The section of road was not marked well and caused many accidents at that same spot (by non autonomous cars). The crash attenuator was even damaged by a crash there just a little while before the crash in question. It was also discovered that if the attenuator had been repaired the driver would most likely be alive today.

I don't defend any of these incidents, quite the contrary. There are no systems out there today that should be considered better than Level II Autonomy. Meaning ultimately it is the driver's responsibility to be in control should the car do anything dangerous. Some situations are out of control of even the best software or drivers, like red light runners. Some accidents and deaths are going to happen no matter what. I think people forget that.

I would also note the data collected in these 'computer on wheels' cars is extensive so we have lots. Tesla releases reports of how often their cars are involved in crashes.
For Q4 2022: using Autopilot there was 1 crash every 4.85 million miles. not using Autopilot there was 1 crash every 1.4 million miles.
The US average is 1 crash every 652,000 miles - 7.44 times MORE LIKELY to be in an crash than using Autopilot.
https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

To clarify - the woman was pushing the bike, and they showed the 'in car video' on the news. The video showed the woman emerging from the shadows in an unlit area of the road between street lights and walking directly in to the path of the car. They gave no explanation why the homeless woman did not see the oncoming cars headlights in the middle of nowhere. It did not seem like an accident that a human driver would likely avoid.

She routinely charged her phone via an electrical plug in the median. On the night of the accident she was wearing a dark coat and clothing. She was also tested positive for methamphetamines - perhaps explains how she didn't see the car. Four signs in the median warned people not to jaywalk directing them instead to a crosswalk 380 feet away. And looking at the video I would guess a human driver would have hit her more often than not too. But that's where the new system was better but failed. It saw the woman a full 6 seconds before impact but the human programmers told it not to react. Sad really.

Isn’t there another video where some asshat intentionally jumped out in front of a self driving car?

Bottom line: The driver was distracted just like most of drivers that kill thousands annually that you have expressed 0 concern about. No pile of links or youtube videos for those drivers or the types of vehicles they drive or the driving assists they may have been using. No driving assist or safety feature relieves one of the personal responsibilities of driving.

Records indicate that streaming began at 9:16 pm and ended at 9:59 pm. Based on an examination of the video captured by the driver-facing camera, Vasquez was looking down toward her right knee 166 times for a total of 6 minutes, 47 seconds during the 21 minutes, 48 seconds preceding the crash. Just prior to the crash, Vasquez was looking at her lap for 5.3 seconds; she looked up half a second before the impact.

How do you feel about cruise control?

What's bad about reducing auto accidents and injuries?

that depends on if you are the insurance company or the body shop

Are ESP and Antilock braking systems ok? Because they are all making decisions instead of you because they are better and faster than you are...

There's plenty of data we can look at to see the results... see below. I've probably logged 50k miles using Autopilot over the last 5 years. I wouldn't say I pay any less attention because it's on. It's a stress reliever. Those micro adjustments by your arms and shoulders take a toll on your body. After a 6 hr driving trip I'm no more tired or sore than if I was sitting in the passenger seat. That to me is worth it as I make that exact trip every quarter to pick up my son from college. But I always rest a hand on the wheel and am ready to take over if needed.

Unlike regularly driven cars that are killing a record average of 20+ pedestrians a day with traffic collisions now being one of the leading cause of deaths for children, right behind firearms.....yeah things are really going great with leaving it entirely up to personal responsibility of the American public...and you want more of that. Genuis! There are lots of bad ideas worth mentioning if you were actually concerned about pedestrian safety, and you have failed to do that repeatedly. You saw an obviously misleading youtube video and closed your mind around it.

Yes. Thats what ESP does. Its takes imperfect human input and interprets what you want the car to do and then it gets the car to do it in the best possible manner.

Its a great idea, as long as there are non-autonomous cars on the road. if 100% of vehicles were autonomous we could probably have autobahn speeds on the interstates for sure.