Originally Posted by vienna (Post 2742988)

Actually, the current gas tax setup isn't really all that fair as it is, if you think about it; if there are two gasoline powered cars, one a gas guzzler, the other a gas saver, and both drivers were to make the same trip for the same distance, the gas guzzler actually pays more in gas taxes (needs more gallons to go the same distance) than the gas saver; for the sake of argument, let's say, for the same trip, the gas guzzler uses 50 gallons of gas, and the gas saver uses 30 gallons of gas; the guzzler, for the same trip, is paying more in taxes for the same trip, every time; this is a common argument used by anti-gas-taxers for as long as I remember, and it is a bit of a valid point...

The main difference with electric vehicles is that, unlike gasoline/diesel vehicles, a user can 'refuel' at home, avoiding the service stations entirely, making the impositions/enforcement of any 'per unit' taxation very difficult; it will probably come down to some sort of mileage tax (imposed, say, at vehicle registration renewal time) or some sort of toll road system, which can be found in several countries, currently; for those who bemoan the 'inequities' of electric vehicles not paying gas taxes, how about simply abolishing gasoline/diesel taxes altogether and just go to the mileage/toll road models?...

One other thing to consider: since the clearly stated intent of our US national policy is to encourage the moving away from dependency on petroleum imports from other nations by seeking to reduce consumption, along with the development of alternative motive methods, it would seem to be a step in that direction to assess a tax premium on the sales and operation of gas/diesel vehicles that needlessly expend fuel merely for the 'enjoyment' or 'pleasure' of the user(s); if you really want to own and drive, say, a Hummer, and use it as a personal vehicle, without any valid practical business use, than maybe you should have to shell out a bit more in taxes/fees for the act of thwarting stated national policy; this is not a new or 'radical' concept; luxury taxes of all kinds exist and are imposed on all manner of expensive, frivolous items and a gas guzzler 'luxury tax' is not that far afield...

Electric and other alternative propulsion vehicles are not going anywhere and are growing in popularity and sales; petroleum powered vehicles, however are progressively diminishing in popularity and, given the auto/truck/other vehicle manufacturers are rapidly 'pulling the plug' on IC vehicles in favor of alternatives, along with continued government support of alternatives as a means of reducing, if not totally eliminating foreign fuel dependency, the dominance of IC vehicles maybe relatively short-lived going forward; I know there are those who fear the impact of reduced revenues of Big Oil as it may impact their investments, 401Ks, etc., but maybe its time for them to reconsider in which basket(s) they are putting their 'eggs', and look to diversify into auto stocks, electric battery development, and other alternative propulsion interests...

No one wants to be like the guy who heavily invested in horse buggy whip as the first Model Ts rolled off the assembly lines...




<O>

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2743043)

As I understand it, it is a huge different between an electric car and a hybrid.

In a hybrid the electric engine, can when fully charged, go around 75-90 km. The idea was that outside cities you used the gasoline in the car and the electric motor in the cities.

While the Electric car is only electric car can drive hundreds of miles when fully charged

Markus

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2743043)

As I understand it, it is a huge different between an electric car and a hybrid.

In a hybrid the electric engine, can when fully charged, go around 75-90 km. The idea was that outside cities you used the gasoline in the car and the electric motor in the cities.

While the Electric car is only electric car can drive hundreds of miles when fully charged

Markus

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2743064)

Forgetting the most important.

What does it take for you - to drop your fossil car and change it with an electric car ?

Markus

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2743064)

Forgetting the most important.

What does it take for you - to drop your fossil car and change it with an electric car ?

Markus

Originally Posted by 3catcircus (Post 2743165)

So, apparently, Tesla's make really good bonfires...

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/18/no-o...as-report.html

Who knew that a burning metal battery bank would require a swimming pool's worth of water to extinguish...

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2743171)

Battery degeneration over the years is one of the issues I would be at war with. Some weeks ago I red an article about some of the older ecars, some years old now, now have maximum ranges that render the practiclaly uselss - becasue replacing the batteries would cost almost a smuch as the whole car had costed fresh from factory. Batteries grow old, no matter whether you use them or not. You cpuld store them under iedal conditions, and they still would loose in maximum capacity they can hold.

Cold temperatures is an issue. You can easily halve the range you used to have during summer. Or more.

Hot temperatures also are an issue degenerating batteries. Thats why ecars in the US, in those states that are hot and dry, suffer more than those in many European countries with their more modest climate. Want to resell your used ecar? By prepared for a bad surprise. Only stupid buy an old battery. And battery repoalcement , material and working hours, can easily cost you 20,000 coins, and then steeply upwards. AndMusk said he does want people top buy complete new cars every couple of years anyway. So much for sustainability and ecological ressource management.


Oh, did I mentioin the enormous ecological footprint to actually just produce an ecar and especially he battery? Dont look too close, it will ruin your sweet illusions in no time.


Charging infrastructure - a bad joke, in all regards. Avialabiltiy, read.-yxstatus, payment systems.

You live in constant fear that you end up on the road, died down over your battery being empty.

Travel times to reach distant destinations multiplay by several factors. And you have to waste, even if yous tay in your city, hours of your weekls time for sitting still and watch as your battery gets loaded at a commercial charging point.

If this is their idea of a progressive future, they can shove it. I would not want such a car even if I would need a car. IMO, ecars serve just one purpose: annihiating money. Your money. They will deceive this fact by making the working, functional alternative even more expansive without need.

This is what you get when you leave the shaping of the future to a hysterical chorus of stupid wretches who, apart from precocious nonsense and hysteria, learn nothing at school, and opportunistic politicians who are not shameless enough to not serve to these spoiled brats to get their votes.

Ecars - Okay. With cars that can refuel, like gasoline, hydrogene or something like that. Electric motors must not be bad, in princicple can be better and demand less maintenance than fossil fuel-driven engines, and be more powerful at the same time. But rechargable batteries? Scorn and ridicule!:haha: Only on a company compound, on a golf course, inside very small cities. There is a reason I assume why the eco-friendly busses in my town do not drive by battery, but hydrogene or plant-made fuel. But I oppose the idea of wasting precious agricultural farming soil for producing - fuel, instead of healthier plants for eating. Its obscene, and in the light of 8+ bn people on this little planet: unexcusable.