Alternative Fuels & Propulsion RANDOM

[balthazar]

"effortless electric burnout" = guitar with no strings = no music.

[ocnblu]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

"effortless electric burnout" = guitar with no strings = no music.

QFT

[G. David Felt]

16 hours ago, balthazar said:

"effortless electric burnout" = guitar with no strings = no music.

I respect your choice in Music, to me it is Music of a different variety.

[oldshurst442]

Guitar with no strings 

 

But we all know what that kid is hearing and feeling deep inside.  No need to hear it. Just feel it. 

Right now, Im feeling this.   

 

And just in case you wanna hear it

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2020 by oldshurst442

[G. David Felt]

Other times Zen tranquility is nice just like an EV.

 

[ocnblu]

I read in Motor Trend that the Rivian "pickup" "truck" is the size of a Tacoma.  HOW CAN YOU FIT IN IT?

 

(I would LUV to see him try!)

Edited July 1, 2020 by ocnblu

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

I read in Motor Trend that the Rivian "pickup" "truck" is the size of a Tacoma.  HOW CAN YOU FIT IN IT?

 

(I would LUV to see him try!)

Your talking about this story where they say it is between a Toyota Tacoma single and double cab. The interior is sized to be full size. The CEO RJ is 6'2" and his son's are tall like him and fit, so I have to believe it is far more roomy than a Tacoma. This is also why I will wait till I can physical sit in the product myself.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020-rivian-r1t-ev-first-look-electric-pickup-truck/

They say the R1T is 215.5 inches long in the story from 2yrs ago.

Today on the actual web site, it is 217.1 inches, so it grew a couple inches. 79.3 inches wide.

https://rivian.com/r1t/

 

[balthazar]

79 x 217 is full size. I don’t think with those numbers it has any size similarity with a tacoma.

[G. David Felt]

California has started to install fast chargers on the rural roads now.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/envisions-ev-arc-provides-solar-powered-dc-fast-charging-along-rural-california-corridor/

[ocnblu]

6 hours ago, balthazar said:

79 x 217 is full size. I don’t think with those numbers it has any size similarity with a tacoma.

Wheelbase

128.30 in

140.50 in

128.30 in

Length, Overall

212.70 in

224.90 in

212.70 in

Width, Max w/o mirrors

74.30 in

74.30 in

74.30 in

The above specs are from Chevy's specs page for the 2021 Colorado crewcab shortbed, crewcab longbed (6 1/2), and extended cab (6 1/2 ft bed).

 

Overall width

75.2

75.2

75.2

Overall length

212.3  

  212.3   

225.5

Wheelbase

127.4

127.4

140.6  And these are the Tacoma's specs.  Copied and pasted hastily. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by ocnblu

[balthazar]

I see what you're saying WRT wheelbase, but width is significantly down vs. 79".
I've never been in either a Colorado or a tacoma... But my old F-150 was 133" WB & about 80" wide (regular cab).

[G. David Felt]

Based on the Skateboard platform, those that have been inside the R1T say it has way more space than a regular full size truck. This would lead me to think that even when the Mid Size trucks are in the same width / length as the R1t, interior is implied to be full size.

[G. David Felt]

Seems that the war is on for who can slip through the Air the best. Lucid says they have the best numbers for aerodynamic efficiency of a luxury car. Seems Mercedes-Benz is going to have to work hard to catch up. lol  

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1128703_lucid-air-claimed-to-be-the-most-aerodynamically-efficient-luxury-car

[G. David Felt]

Seems the first fuel cell plane test flight was a success making it net zero equal for a plane.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/zeroavia-completes-test-flight-of-fuel-cell-airplane/

A video of the plane is a bum as I was wanting to hear how it sounded and the put a music track on it that keeps us from hearing.

Cool Motor

Finally found their post of it and WOW is that nice and Quiet.

 

Chili just bought 150 electric buses from China to expand their bus fleet to 455 Electric buses, 2nd largest in the world behind China.

https://electrek.co/2020/07/02/egeb-chile-orders-150-e-buses-santiago-france-nuclear-nevada-ev/

[riviera74]

We could certainly use those electric buses here.  Think of all the savings from NOT using diesel alone on virtually all US school buses, not to mention all the reductions in air pollution.  Saving green while going green: that should be the American way.

[balthazar]

What savings?

[riviera74]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

What savings?

Savings from buying all that diesel fuel and other fossil fuels generally.

[balthazar]

How come the purchase price doesn’t get included in the cost analysis?
 

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, riviera74 said:

Savings from buying all that diesel fuel and other fossil fuels generally.

Agree the Diesel fuel, various oils, gaskets, etc. there is much that does not get factored into the purchase price of a Diesel bus other than the fuel that would move the price higher. Electrics are higher priced right now, will come down over time, but they have a longer life on the road than ICE. 

I truly think if they figured in all the rebuilds, repairs on the ICE buses along with the amount of costs for holding tanks, disposal of toxic liquid, etc. the price of a diesel bus would go up considerably.

[oldshurst442]

Ill go out on a limb and say:

Cost of operation and initial purchase price and all the minute details regarding cost means very little in terms of us humans turning the corner and trying to live more environmentally friendly.

Take that how you will, but this being an EV thread, we could discuss how green fossil fuels are versus how green electric power grids are. 

The mining of battery elements versus oil drilling is the same.  Both need diesel power equipment to extract the materials from the earth.  Moot point.

The transportation of said natural  materials to their processing destinations is also the same as both use diesel and gasoline powered vehicles for delivery.

Transportation of final product (battery) and actual gasoline is also the same. 

Gasoline needs to be refined and that sometimes means that the energy used is not green and electricity is sometimes produced by coal powered plants so that too is the same.

After the life of the battery is done, recycling of the battery is not yet defined. So that could be an advantage for the fossil fuel advocates.

The problem though is that electricity in some cities/countries is produced by actual green sources and where the electric powered vehicle really gets an advantage over the fossil fueled one is that when an electric vehicle is used, virtually no pollutants are released in the atmosphere.

Remember though, even if a coal powered plant is used to produce the electricity for recharging purposes, the electricity is being transported by wires to the charging station... 

But...oil and gasoline CONTINUE to be transported by fossil fueled vehicles to the gasoline station on a daily basis.  Everyday. Every week. Every month. Every year. Every decade.  

Sometimes...the initial purchase price is really not that important when you factor in how we humans SHOULD be changing how we go on about our lives going forward in 2020 and beyond.  

Unless of course you dont think how humans live now is not harming our planet.  Then it doesnt matter what I or anybody else says.  

Go on about and live your life the way you want to.   Humans do have that choice to do what they want and we have that over the other animals we share our planet with. We have free will after all...

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

I truly think if they figured in all the rebuilds, repairs on the ICE buses along with the amount of costs for holding tanks, disposal of toxic liquid, etc. the price of a diesel bus would go up considerably.

They already do that, Felt.
(If not 100%) 99% of school buses are owned by 1. municipalities, 2. school districts or 3. bus companies. All 3 of those entities MUST record & report all operating expenses, either for tax or budgetary purposes. The costs for a bus fleet at a given entity are well known down to the dollar.

But the unproven claim that an EV bus lasts longer is irrelevant, because all of school districts I looked at last year researching this all had limits on bus life, usually by number of years (often around 12 years IIRC) Now, perhaps that could be re-written for an EV bus, but that would take time and I'll bet require some study/grant to support that change. But diesel buses' powertrain life is not an issue; they'll go 300K miles with aplomb.... except no school allows buses to be held in fleet anywhere near that long.

So we're left with the scenario that the amortization of a MUCH higher EV bus purchase price over the same artificial lifespan limitation would require A. greatly increased school district budgets, IE: raised school taxes, or B. greatly increased bus lease deals with bus companies looking to avoid bankruptcy in order to pay off said buses' higher MSRPs. Which again goes back to school budget approvals.

Of course, Gov't is exemplary at wasting & squandering money, so it may well steamroll a 50% hike in budgetary transportation costs to get EV buses in fleet; we'll have to see.

[ocnblu]

10 hours ago, balthazar said:

I see what you're saying WRT wheelbase, but width is significantly down vs. 79".
I've never been in either a Colorado or a tacoma... But my old F-150 was 133" WB & about 80" wide (regular cab).

I am not sure if the quoted width for the Rivian is overall WITH mirrors or without.

[balthazar]

I believe OEMs report without mirrors.
My Silverado is 79.7, and I guarandamntee you that's without mirrors.
B-59 is 80.74 and doesn't have any standard sideviews.

[ocnblu]

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

I believe OEMs report without mirrors.

Right, but GM, Ford, Toyota and Chrysler are professionals. 

Seems Rivian is not yet there.

[balthazar]

On their website, the Rivian R1T has a width of 79.3 and a track of 67.3.
Difference of 12", divided by 2 = 6 inches from center of tire to edge of 'envelope' (body).
Tires are 275/65R20, for a sectional width of 10.8" / 2 = 5.4" per side.
So track of 67.3 plus 10.8 (2 half tires) = 78.1.
I'd say it's safe to say the mirrors stick out more than 0.6" per side.

79.3 is body width.
Whew- exercise.

Edited July 3, 2020 by balthazar

[ocnblu]

Seems you've done yer homework there, Skippy

[balthazar]

For you, Bill. 
Taxes due the 15th, time to blow the rust off the mental gears.

[ocnblu]

Got any of that WD-40 left?  Might need to borrow it

[G. David Felt]

22 hours ago, balthazar said:

They already do that, Felt.
(If not 100%) 99% of school buses are owned by 1. municipalities, 2. school districts or 3. bus companies. All 3 of those entities MUST record & report all operating expenses, either for tax or budgetary purposes. The costs for a bus fleet at a given entity are well known down to the dollar.

But the unproven claim that an EV bus lasts longer is irrelevant, because all of school districts I looked at last year researching this all had limits on bus life, usually by number of years (often around 12 years IIRC) Now, perhaps that could be re-written for an EV bus, but that would take time and I'll bet require some study/grant to support that change. But diesel buses' powertrain life is not an issue; they'll go 300K miles with aplomb.... except no school allows buses to be held in fleet anywhere near that long.

So we're left with the scenario that the amortization of a MUCH higher EV bus purchase price over the same artificial lifespan limitation would require A. greatly increased school district budgets, IE: raised school taxes, or B. greatly increased bus lease deals with bus companies looking to avoid bankruptcy in order to pay off said buses' higher MSRPs. Which again goes back to school budget approvals.

Of course, Gov't is exemplary at wasting & squandering money, so it may well steamroll a 50% hike in budgetary transportation costs to get EV buses in fleet; we'll have to see.

You are right that they have the records on the cost of maintenance for a bus in a fleet.

Yet NO WHERE do they show adding this to the Purchase price of a Diesel Bus when they compare it to the EV Bus which has always pointed out the reduced maintenance cost.

If they did that, I think even on a 12 year comparison they would come out much closer.

Started to search around and found a few reports. Many are done outside of the US, India and China where they have already flipped over to more EV than Diesel so I ignored those.

Pointes stated in the reports:

• 528 EV buses with 1yr maintenance records used to compare to diesel buses
• Diesel bus costs $500,000 versus $750,000 EV bus for Transit.
• School diesel costs $110,000 versus $230,000 EV bus
• New Flyer buses for Transit and Schools allowed access to this report of their maintenance costs for both buses.
• EV Buses save $400,000 in fuel expense and $125,000 in maintenance cost averted over the 12 year life of the bus.
• Seneca South Carolina shared their records, shows EV Buses are 16.5 mpg equivalent fuel efficiency compared to 3.8 MPG for Diesel. 
• Fuel Per Mile costs was $0.28 for Electric, $0.59 for diesel with maintenance costs of $0.55 permile for EV buses compared to $1.53 per mile for Diesel.
• Report also states that for those school districts and Cities that used Solar Power Charging where the surplus was sold back to the local grid, this further reduced costs.
• Another point made was the reductions in EPA certificates and disposal of toxic waste related to gas/diesel buses.

Here are US based reports:

https://www.publicpower.org/periodical/article/electric-buses-mass-transit-seen-cost-effective

https://uspirg.org/feature/usp/electric-buses-america

https://www.govtech.com/workforce/Electric-Buses-Are-Not-Only-Clean-But-Less-Costly-to-Run.html

[ccap41]

i just know i would love it if the buses I rode were electric. The clunky-@ss transmissions and air brakes and howling diesel at interstate speeds make me want that ironed out. 

[balthazar]

^ And I would agree with that. But wants and costs are common head-butt-ers.

We've been over this before, but here it is again.
Federal Highway Admin reports the average annual mileage for school buses is only 8000.
Recommended lifespan for conventional (Type C & D) is 12-15 years. This varies somewhat beyond that; excess mileage can shorten the lifespan, as can physical deterioration of surfaces due to local weather/climate. There have been numerous studies that were utilized to come to this recommendation.

Like I stated earlier, it may well be that EV buses see a longer allowable lifespan in the future, but there's more to the current limitation that just the buses' powertrain.

8000 x 12 years is only 96,000 miles. At 10 MPG, a diesel bus would burn 9600 gals of fuel. Even given $3/gal, that's only $28,800 in fuel over 12 years. Somehow, dfelt's post above sourced some wild estimate that an EV bus :

save $400,000 in fuel expense and $125,000 in maintenance cost averted over the 12 year life of the bus.

It's simply a ridiculous number, and therefore is assuredly a 'loaded' number to push a viewpoint.
Taking that point as logical, the "$400,000" savings drops by $371,200!!

- - - -
The National Assoc of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services states:
"Available funding is likely the single most important consideration in determining when school buses are replaced."

To repeat myself - it sounds great to have these much quieter, no exhaust buses floating around, but there has to be money to pay for them.

[ccap41]

I think for schools, at their initial costs, is not worth it yet. 

For private companies or anywhere else where there are many more miles put on them and they're going to be used for more than a "state budget says we can get a new one even if it's perfectly functioning but it's been X years", they seem much more financially smart. 

I don't know the miles my bus does per day but when it was a full schedule they probably made two or three trips in the morning and same in the afternoon(nothing between 8-330). Each round trip is probably about 80 miles so they'd need 160-240 miles of range and can charge between 8-330 and again over night. 

I'm assuming dfelt's numbers were not school buses. 

[balthazar]

Another factoid: even with the low annual average mileage, due to the sheer volume of units, school buses vastly out-travel any other bus usage ( such as public trans). They’d make the largest difference as far as emissions, but the largest replacement cost. I already pay around $6500 JUST in school taxes as it is.

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

I'm assuming dfelt's numbers were not school buses. 

IDK. Bullets 3 and 4 reference school buses....

[G. David Felt]

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

8000 x 12 years is only 96,000 miles. At 10 MPG, a diesel bus would burn 9600 gals of fuel. Even given $3/gal, that's only $28,800 in fuel over 12 years. Somehow, dfelt's post above sourced some wild estimate that an EV bus :

Yet all the reports show that Transit and School buses average 3 MPG, NOT 10MPG, that right there is a HUGE COST in Diesel which is Toxic and pollutes the Air, kids, riders, etc.

[balthazar]

Most links I googled said 8-12 specifically for school buses and (much heavier) motorhomes of the same class, but even if it was 3, that's triple the cost, or less than $90,000, NOT "$400,000". Buses would have to get 0.7 MPG to burn that much fuel. It's disingenuous.

[G. David Felt]

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

Most links I googled said 8-12 specifically for school buses and (much heavier) motorhomes of the same class, but even if it was 3, that's triple the cost, or less than $90,000, NOT "$400,000". Buses would have to get 0.7 MPG to burn that much fuel. It's disingenuous.

I only quoted what was supplied by those that opened up their service books for school buses and transit buses. Transit does get higher MPG than School due to freeway runs compared to local neighborhoods. 

[balthazar]

^ Assumedly so on transit vs school, tho vehicle to vehicle I would imagine transit buses average higher miles annually.
 

The $400K number, regardless of the source, is not credible. In fact, as stated, it’s literally an unbelievable figure.

[G. David Felt]

14 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ Assumedly so on transit vs school, tho vehicle to vehicle I would imagine transit buses average higher miles annually.
 

The $400K number, regardless of the source, is not credible. In fact, as stated, it’s literally an unbelievable figure.

I agree with you on Transit over school buses.

In regards to the $400k cost, since these are various government agencies / school districts, until proven false, I have to assume the record keeping is valid.

[balthazar]

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

I have to assume the record keeping is valid.

Why would you do that?

I never take gov't figures at face value. Too much politicizing & incentivizing.
Did you know Gov't considers you 'employeed' if you work 1 hour per week?

$400,000 divided by $2.50 = 160,000 gallons of fuel.
Even at 1 MPG (NASCAR racers get 5MPG feeding 850 HP doing 200 MPH steady), that 160,000 gallons is 13,333 gal per year and 13K miles. School buses average only 8000. That alone pushes the formula’s MPG to well under 1 MPG.

Besides the obvious fact that it’s a suspiciously round number, this is merely critical thinking.

Edited July 7, 2020 by balthazar

[G. David Felt]

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

Why would you do that?

Figure that a round number would be an average between buses that run high and low. I know that the School buses on the peninsula here in Washington average 15,000 miles a year due to the far spread out range of the kids in the small towns that get picked up unlike the school buses in Seattle that average 6,000 miles a year. 

I will make the assumption that the medium to small towns that have opened up their books have a mixture of both high mileage and low mileage buses.

I understand the point your making though. The optimist in me looks at the positive side of people being honest till proven they are liars. 

[balthazar]

So you’re thinking that $400,000 is an AVERAGE 12-yr fuel-only cost, and some buses maybe are going thru what; $700,000 in fuel??

Were they just pouring gallons of it out on the road?? 

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

So you’re thinking that $400,000 is an AVERAGE 12-yr fuel-only cost, and some buses maybe are going thru what; $700,000 in fuel??

Were they just pouring gallons of it out on the road?? 

I see the 2019 public transit report for the US is out and updated including now a Canadian section.

https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/APTA_Fact-Book-2019_FINAL.pdf

Some interesting facts, the one noticeable change is Diesel buses where 70% in 2008 and now in 2019 only make up 42% as the US changes to hybrid and EV buses.

Due to increased ridership in transit, diesel fuel stayed consistent at about 600 Million gallons a year used in the US while CNG, Propane and Electricity increased as ridership increased.

Page 32 is where you have the top 50 largest transit agencies and the passenger miles. Interesting is that the current info here is up to 2017 and compares to 2016. Depending on where you have growth in jobs, it clearly shows the higher growth cities.

Washington State Ferries is the largest in the US as I knew, and continues to grow.

Lots of good info.

This report shows that CNG / Hybrid buses are far more efficient than Diesel buses. The average use in Transit / Schools is as you say, 12yrs with 500,000 miles expected.

https://mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/CNG Diesel Hybrid Comparison FINAL 05nov13.pdf

Here are some additional sources of info that show EV transit buses outweigh costs.

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-electric-buses-benefits-outweigh-costs

 

[G. David Felt]

Seems more and more EV bus studies are coming out showing they are lower cost of operation even with a slightly higher cost of purchase.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/iea-case-study-electric-buses-in-helsinki-finland/

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/case-study-2-electric-buses-in-santiago-chile/

[balthazar]

These reports still seem to be selling EVs by segregating purchase cost and operating costs, as if they weren’t in play, every single time, on the same physical object.

[G. David Felt]

AC cars, a British automaker will be launching a licensed EV version of the Cobra at $138,000 with a 150 mile battery pack range with 308HP / 469 lb-ft of torque going 0 to 62mph in 6.7 seconds. Car will weigh 2,755 lbs.

They admit it is not equal to the Racing cobra's but clearly out performs the original AC Cobra which were powered by inline 4 & 6 cylinder engines.

https://electrek.co/2020/07/07/ac-cars-is-building-an-electric-cobra-for-138000/

[G. David Felt]

First picture is out of a Ford Mach e next to a Tesla Y at a charging station. To me, the Mach e looks way better than the Tesla.

Details comparing the two can be reviewed here:

https://electrek.co/2020/07/07/tesla-model-y-ford-mustang-mach-e-picture-side-by-side/

[balthazar]

IMO, there’s very little significant difference except -as usual- the Tesla looks bloated. (Realistically, the Model S is the only one that doesn’t.) 

[oldshurst442]

In all honesty. All small and medium sized CUVs look pathetic. 

Jeep Wranglers and GCs excluded.  There are some CUVs that are acceptable. Barely though. 

The Model S is a good looking car.  But its a tad dated now. It desperately needs a refresh. Not a mild one either. A major exterior overhaul would be welcomed.  

The other Tesla cars are not exactly pretty. The Model 3 and Model Y for me fall under the barely acceptable category. The Model X is pathetic.

The Mach E for me is a notch above acceptable but below good looking.  I prefer the Jeep GC over it.  The Mach E edges out the Ford Edge for me. And yes, I kinda like the Edge.  But I much much much prefer the REAL SUVs from FoMoCo.  You know. The big guys. The BOF ones...

I probably would like the Bronco. On the same level as a Wrangler. And a Toyota 4Runner. (Well, if the 4Runner didnt have that fugly face) 

(I realize this post reads like Im drunk or high...I assure you, Im sober...)  

 

[G. David Felt]

28 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

In all honesty. All small and medium sized CUVs look pathetic. 

Jeep Wranglers and GCs excluded.  There are some CUVs that are acceptable. Barely though. 

The Model S is a good looking car.  But its a tad dated now. It desperately needs a refresh. Not a mild one either. A major exterior overhaul would be welcomed.  

The other Tesla cars are not exactly pretty. The Model 3 and Model Y for me fall under the barely acceptable category. The Model X is pathetic.

The Mach E for me is a notch above acceptable but below good looking.  I prefer the Jeep GC over it.  The Mach E edges out the Ford Edge for me. And yes, I kinda like the Edge.  But I much much much prefer the REAL SUVs from FoMoCo.  You know. The big guys. The BOF ones...

I probably would like the Bronco. On the same level as a Wrangler. And a Toyota 4Runner. (Well, if the 4Runner didnt have that fugly face) 

(I realize this post reads like Im drunk or high...I assure you, Im sober...)  

 

Your HIGH, HIGH on Life!