New Range Extender

[Mach1E]

I think the point is that burning fossil fuels is literally burning money plus releasing noxious fumes into the atmosphere whereas making physical items from petroleum products makes our modern life work. By all means use oil for making things, phamaceuticals etc but burning it for the sake of it is not the way forward. Less oil drilled for and refined.

Yes, less.

And that’s the point of the range extenders. They’re a good thing.

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of not liking the range extenders and claiming to have “nothing to do with gas” when it’s really not the case.

The purpose of driving an EV and the purpose of an EV with a range extender are the same- use LESS petroleum.

But neither can claim to use none.

Sponsored

 

[Mach1E]

Wow really getting into the weeds aren't we. When I say I want "nothing to do with gasoline" I'm referring to operating my car! And your meat analogy does not align.

Meat is a transient product, like auto fuel, leather tends to last longer than the time it takes to eat a meal. If the only reason to raise cattle was for the purpose of garments, we'd need a lot less cows because a) not all clothes are made from leather and b) a single leather product can last years without needing timely replacement like meat in a grocery store. Same thing goes for using petroleum for plastic vs gasoline. The plastic container sitting in my drawer for five years is not contributing to the warming of the planet. The emissions from millions of tailpipes every second of every day all over the world are. We don't need to be 100% oil free, we just need to stop burning the shit.

It’s a lovely sentiment but practically impossible in today’s world.

Just like how you compromise by driving a car filled with plastic and running on petroleum based tires while built with materials that were shipped and mined using petroleum powered vehicles…… it’s a compromise.

And these range extenders are a compromise, but I think they’re a compromise in the right direction.

 

[corradoborg]

Yes, less.

And that’s the point of the range extenders. They’re a good thing.

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of not liking the range extenders and claiming to have “nothing to do with gas” when it’s really not the case.

The purpose of driving an EV and the purpose of an EV with a range extender are the same- use LESS petroleum.

But neither can claim to use none.

But one of them CAN claim to use even less than the other. Both vehicles use durable petroleum products and both cause petroleum to be burned by the extraction, manufacturing, and shipment that gets them to us. Only one continues to burn liquid gasoline as part of its normal use, no matter how little of it. You have to admit that, between the two, the pure EV is the better choice for reducing petroleum use, even if only by a little. Since we've established that the goal is "less," the pure EV better accomplishes that goal.

Yes, an EREV is better in this regard than a pure ICE vehicle. Everybody knows that. Nobody's arguing otherwise. And nobody on this forum is going to somehow make EREVs not happen just by being in the minority saying they will never consider purchasing one. It's true that a pure EV isn't the best choice for every single use case with the current technology. Some people are inevitably going to choose them. But EREVs - like the other types of hybrids - are always going to be a complex transitional technology, and nothing more. The future lies in improving the battery technology and charging speeds of EVs.

Also, some of us vegetarians DO avoid leather products as well. I don't wear leather shoes or belts or use leather products in any way I can avoid. One of the things I love about my Mach-E is the high quality synthetic leather interior. Yes, that's also a petroleum product... I know. But a petroleum product that, long-term, does far less harm to the environment than what it takes to generate the same quantity of leather.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

As reigning King of Driving Discussions Off Topic in these here parts, all I’ve got to say is “Wow, this discussion has really strayed far afield. The weeds are really tall here.” I’m proud of all of you.

 

[HuntingPudel]

As reigning King of Driving Discussions Off Topic in these here parts, all I’ve got to say is “Wow, this discussion has really strayed far afield. The weeds are really tall here.” I’m proud of all of you.

I have had to find, flush, and retrieve birds from really tall weeds.

 

[Mach1E]

As reigning King of Driving Discussions Off Topic in these here parts, all I’ve got to say is “Wow, this discussion has really strayed far afield. The weeds are really tall here.” I’m proud of all of you.

You think so? This is nothing, we’ve been way deeper in the jungle before.

At least we’re still talking about range extenders.

 

[Mach1E]

But one of them CAN claim to use even less than the other. Both vehicles use durable petroleum products and both cause petroleum to be burned by the extraction, manufacturing, and shipment that gets them to us. Only one continues to burn liquid gasoline as part of its normal use, no matter how little of it. You have to admit that, between the two, the pure EV is the better choice for reducing petroleum use, even if only by a little. Since we've established that the goal is "less," the pure EV better accomplishes that goal.

Yes, an EREV is better in this regard than a pure ICE vehicle. Everybody knows that. Nobody's arguing otherwise. And nobody on this forum is going to somehow make EREVs not happen just by being in the minority saying they will never consider purchasing one. It's true that a pure EV isn't the best choice for every single use case with the current technology. Some people are inevitably going to choose them. But EREVs - like the other types of hybrids - are always going to be a complex transitional technology, and nothing more. The future lies in improving the battery technology and charging speeds of EVs.

Also, some of us vegetarians DO avoid leather products as well. I don't wear leather shoes or belts or use leather products in any way I can avoid. One of the things I love about my Mach-E is the high quality synthetic leather interior. Yes, that's also a petroleum product... I know. But a petroleum product that, long-term, does far less harm to the environment than what it takes to generate the same quantity of leather.

I’ve been saying for years that it’s the batteries that should be the transitional technology.

EV motors are awesome.

Batteries suck as a fuel source. Heavy, expensive and slow to refuel. Been that way for 130 years too.

If we can reduce the size of the battery and/or get a better fuel source, that’s the ticket. These battery extenders might be a step closer to the end goal if we can fuel them with something better for the environment.

 

[Firefly Ship Works]

I’ve been saying for years that it’s the batteries that should be the transitional technology.

EV motors are awesome.

Batteries suck as a fuel source. Heavy, expensive and slow to refuel. Been that way for 130 years too.

If we can reduce the size of the battery and/or get a better fuel source, that’s the ticket. These battery extenders might be a step closer to the end goal if we can fuel them with something better for the environment.

I've been rooting for hydrogen fuel cells for years but their future doesn't look promising. The biggest problem (as I understand it) is the cost of building out infrastructure, but that was once the problem with EVs as well.

 

[tonytaylor53]

Currently, hydrogen is just green-washed fossil fuel. It might not always be, but I don't see Big Oil loosening that grip as long as they can do it for half the cost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production#Environmental_impact

 

[superdave80]

I've been rooting for hydrogen fuel cells for years but their future doesn't look promising. The biggest problem (as I understand it) is the cost of building out infrastructure, but that was once the problem with EVs as well.

There is also the fact that we don't have hydrogen just lying around to use. Producing it is expensive and not particularly clean. Storing and transport of hydrogen are always going to be an issue. And the fuel cells themselves aren't particularly cheap.

But other than that...

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

But other than that...

“Hydrogen is the fuel of the future.” Always has been and always will be.

 

[Mach1E]

There is also the fact that we don't have hydrogen just lying around to use. Producing it is expensive and not particularly clean. Storing and transport of hydrogen are always going to be an issue. And the fuel cells themselves aren't particularly cheap.

But other than that...

The point is that batteries are bad too.

We need better options to power electric motors.

Nuclear still comes to mind. Works for submarines!

 

[ChrisO]

The point is that batteries are bad too.

We need better options to power electric motors.

Nuclear still comes to mind. Works for submarines!

Yeah, having millions of radioactive vehicles driving around, getting into accidents, is a good idea.

Battery options may not be ideal now, that is changing. It is going to take some time, and as such ideas like the range extenders for the situations where a full BEV isn't viable is a pretty good idea.

But should every car have it? I don't think so.

 

[Nis]

I would rather see an additional battery of say 20+kwh that is easily removable and could fit in the frunk or similar.
Bring it on trips where that extra range matters and leave it at home otherwise, maybe doubling as a house battery for peak cost hours.

 

[HuntingPudel]

The point is that batteries are bad too.

We need better options to power electric motors.

Nuclear still comes to mind. Works for submarines!

A squirrel chasing a nut on a treadmill comes to mind.

Sponsored