Sorry meant range of cars at different price points
Sorry meant range of cars at different price pointsThe Tesla model 3 which is Australia’s leading EV, gets over 400kms range, that’s pretty decent in my opinion, it’s pretty much equal to most people fuel tank.
The added benefit though is you don’t have to go to a petrol station, if you arrive home with 5% charge you just plug in and it’s back to 400km range again in the morning.
Also, let’s say you did have to drive 500km in one day, so you need to charge some where through out that day, you don’t have to charge up to 100%, you just plug in for 5 or 6 minutes to get that extra 15% of so to get you home and then top up at home.
This happened to me the other day, (for the first time in 2 years), I was driving round the city all day running errands, and by the time I was ready to head home it calculated that I would arrive home with 6% charge, that was a bit close for me so I stopped at a charger for literally only 3 mins, in which I took on about 15% charge then I drove home and plugged in.
Almost no one is going to be driving more than 400km without Stopping for a few minutes, And you won’t be driving 400km without passing a charger some where along the way.
Yep, I agree there, as I said the thing that raises the price of EV’s is the battery, that’s why I say the luxury car tax is a battery tax when it comes to EV’s, and should be either abolished, or have the threshold raised by $20K for EV’s and other zero emission cars.Sorry meant range of cars at different price points
Tesla is shifting to LFP for its "standard" models as Musk says he likes the idea of being able to charge to 100%.Tesla battery technology is at least 8 yeas ahead of everyone else, and battery technology includes the software side.
Would be interesting to see towing capacity and how towing a load affects range.The chart below, produced by VW, shows why Europe will get all the EVs they can lay their hands on:
View attachment 133542
The obvious downside by way of comparisons, is range. However, as noted previously, battery pack upgrades are available and the additional cost is in a fashion recoverable by way of energy storage capacity after the life of the vehicle.
Despite the present high cost of the very few EVs available in Australia, purchasing one now or sooner rather than later is likely to pay off. That's because you will be able to offset the higher price today against the retained resale value (assuming a holding period of at about 3 years).
Yep, I use autopilot all the time.I still need a Ute. I don't want that dicky looking one Tesla came up with though. I feel like I'm going to be waiting around for a long time.
Does the tesla autopilot feature work in Australia?
If you tow a boat or a van on a regular basis you buy a vehicle fit for purpose.Would be interesting to see towing capacity and how towing a load affects range.
Apart from Audi the EV's seem short of torque.
I'll never sell my Ute, a Holden VF SS-V. Valuation has gone crazy, I could sell it for the same price I paid for it new in 2014. Last of an icon :-(I still need a Ute. I don't want that dicky looking one Tesla came up with though. I feel like I'm going to be waiting around for a long time.
Does the tesla autopilot feature work in Australia?
My parents could use the feature after driving behind them. How much is the full self driving? (If it's available yet)I'll never sell my Ute, a Holden VF SS-V. Valuation has gone crazy, I could sell it for the same price I paid for it new in 2014. Last of an icon :-(
Our Tesla is amazing, I compare it to a spaceship. The Auto Pilot is very handy for assisting in relaxed driving. I'd love to have Full Self Driving, but not at the price they are asking.
Full self driving is about $10k I think now.My parents could use the feature after driving behind them. How much is the full self driving? (If it's available yet)
So there you have it.Transportation accounts for 29% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, and more than half of that comes from passenger vehicles. Since taking office in January, the Biden administration has taken steps toward electrification, but also failed to sign onto a pledge announced at COP26 to phase out fossil-fuel vehicles by 2040.
Electric vehicles are one piece of a strategy to slash transport emissions, but they tend to receive far more attention than proposals to cut car use. The electrification of transportation is essential — there is no doubt about that — but just replacing every personal vehicle with a battery-powered equivalent will produce an environmental disaster of its own. Such a strategy also denies us the opportunity to rethink a near-century of misguided auto-oriented city planning.
The focus on tailpipe emissions misses the bigger picture, and at a moment when we can see the complex, global nature of supply chains in our everyday lives, we need to think beyond such a limited framing of electric vehicles' environmental impact.
For example, particulate matter created from tire, brake, and road wear, as well as the dust kicked up by cars on the road, does not fuel climate change, but it does create air pollution that's harmful to human health. In the United States, these pollutants are responsible for about 53,000 premature deaths each year, and heavier electric vehicles like SUVs and trucks could actually generate more particulate matter than lighter, non-electric cars.
Yet while health effects are important, the biggest concern is the minerals that are required to make the batteries that power electric vehicles and the mining that has to happen to extract them. It's a reality that seriously dirties their green image, and shows the "zero emissions" branding simply isn't accurate.
Ahead of COP26, the International Energy Agency released its latest World Energy Outlook that estimated achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 will require six times more minerals by mid-century than is necessary today. Yet the majority of those minerals are required for electric vehicles and storage, whose mineral demand is projected to increase by "well over 50 times by 2050" as the demand for batteries to power them grows substantially. As a result, the United States is assessing its own mineral supply chains and working with Canada to expand mining activities to supply battery makers. But all that mining comes with consequences.
Paris Marx, as good as an example of Nominative Determinism as I have seen
So there you have it.
Will probably have to resort to horse drawn ploughs, and scythes.
it will be great.
Mick
Thing is, the article doesn't say that's required in order to save the planet.Paris Marx, as good as an example of Nominative Determinism as I have seen in a while, writes in Business Insider that EV's won't save the planet, we need to get rid of ALL cars.
Agreed, Even if Climate Change didn’t exist I still would want my EV, it’s just such a more convenient form of motoring.Another example of reluctance to change with the times. Introducing EV's is not all about 'saving the environment', it is also about improving transport and bringing it out of the 20th century, creating new opportunities, weening us off of imported oil.
Enjoy the cave Mick ;-)
Maybe just keep some as part of a diversified group of miners.Does this mean I should sell my Nickel stocks?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?