This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
it would also be impossible, even if you were able to input the same amount of energy as used, there would still be frictional and resistance considerations that would always make the charging end of the deal fall behind.If somebody could come up with a way for batteries in EV's to be charged while the vehicle is in use ( not rely on charging stations).....that would make EV's GOLDEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is pretty much spot on, the same group of whackos that wiped out the nuclear energy source is now looking for an efficient energy source.. that horse has left the stable. The US Navy has proven over and over how efficient nuclear power can be, several years ago an island in the Carribean got slammed with a hurricane, the Navy pulled a carrier over and powerred their grid for about 3 weeks until they could get things up and running.They have to balance between what the brain trust in DC today, and in the future will want. The logical way forward is with electric via nuclear power to expand the grid. The grid MUST come first. Unfortunately, da gubbermint has placed demand way before supply upgrades. One party has been anti-nuke since the seventies. It will take a come to jesus between those who don't want and those who want within that party before progress can be made. Then business will have a somewhat clear path. Until then, business has to adapt to the stupidity any way they can. Why split ICE from EV?? Besides the tech being very different. If one tubes, via government change, the other survives.
Anything beyond 50% EV is also a lie. Electric "Commuter cars" make perfect sense. If you have to drive a distance, ICE is the only solution. Two hour stops every 4 hours to "Refuel" is not a solution. Its the problem.
Michigan has a pilot program that Ford is involved in.Isn't someone already working on road technology that capacitively charges as the vehicle drives down the road?
That reminds me, I need to go out back and burn some brush I cut down.So I just traded my F150 lightning back for an ICE truck, because of the limitations mentioned - limited working (ie towing) range, and non-existent high speed (DC) charging in non metro areas. I get the idea to add some charging infrastructure - give your customers an easy off ramp to any ford dealer to give their EV a boost, especially in rural towns. But pushing all of the cost burden to the dealer is wrong, Ford should be a better partner than that.
The lightning drove and handled great, kudos to the engineering team. But so many factors can degrade the range (weather, load, highway driving), and those are not hidden from the driver (like today's gauges in ICE cars - always reading normal) - so you see you range shrink daily - makes for a lot of anxiety. It worked great as a commuter - 80mi/day, and for towing short hauls. But it did not make sense, at it's price point, to have to make all the compromises.
I agree with everyone's observations - we need nuclear power, more grid, and more fast charging to make it all work. Not sure we can even get to 2 out of 3 with the politics and profit taking. But hey, if they solve some emissions in the metros, I guess it's ok. The power plants can mess up the air quality in the sticks where no one yells about it.
If somebody could come up with a way for batteries in EV's to be charged while the vehicle is in use ( not rely on charging stations).....that would make EV's GOLDEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!