Tesla truck running on diesel. Alot more to come

correct mate, truckers kicking around ideas. You seem to come across as if we are making policy here and everything said needs to be pier reviewed or cited. Not just too me either sadly. You keep defending whatever you are fending. I'll move on with progress.

 

I think the main issue people have with EVs is that a lot of us feel like they are being shoved down our throat. I have zero issue with letting the market control the EV market, but that's not what is happening. There is also just so much dishonesty behind the EV push.

All any vehicle propulsion system does is convert energy. Converting energy from one form to another is hard to do efficiently, 30% is actually really good.

 

The government didn't tell the RR "you must use diesel trains". They didn't care what the trains were powered by, as long as the military goods got moved.

 

You could be right, but I worry the wildlife population will be depleted in short order if people have to start hunting to eat. I just remember my Granddad telling me about when he was a kid. They lived in a time and rural community where a lot of people still hunted to survive, They would go out and have a hard time finding anything to hunt and kill, often going hungry because the hunt didn't turn up anything. Fast forward to today, with hardly anybody hunting to keep from starving and game laws in place, wild game is everywhere. I can now walk out on my back porch and fill the freezer in short order, but I don't think it would take long to wipe that out. Then add to the fact that there are lots of people that would think it would be easier to just steal your food than go out and hunt for themselves. I don't think any of us would want to live though that. but I agree that we aren't as far away from that as some people think.

 

I couldn't agree more. Overwhelming number of EV sales are made due to Government handouts on the purchase. Let the market dictate what it wants/needs.

 

The progress you talk about is built on a very simple method, the working principle of that method is falsifying observations. You seem to be taking contradictory information personally even though it's the heart of the process. Just because I don't agree with you and I present my case for you to scrutinize in the same way I put pressure on yours doesn't mean I'm attacking your identity mate.

 

Umm, yeah they did. The war production board said "no more diesel locomotives" for a couple three years. They also heavily subsidized the increase in refining capacity and nationwide transportation and storage of both gas and diesel.

More to the point, without government contracts Electro Motive would not have survived as a company through the early 1930s. Nor would they have been able to field a reliable and desirable locomotive after the war production board lifted restrictions. They got millions in R&D, they got millions to build the plants/supply chain and train the workers. The switch probably would have happened anyways, but it happened much faster due to government intervention.

More generally to the automotive industry- government built the infrastructure necessary for cars and trucks. Government paid incentives for people to open gas stations and created regulations that made horse ownership in cities more expensive.

 

I really don't see what's been shoved down our throats, or what wrong with EV generally. We had seat belts, air bags, ABS, Traction control, Stability control, Emission controls all mandated for us. To be honest I enjoy all those features, especially the road ways not smelling like a drag stip.

In the UK you can't drive a Euro 3 spec diesel vehicle in London I think, and a Euro 4 only to with a certain permitter. People don't like that. But similarly they stopped using coal for heating homes in the late 1800s because it was causing respiratory issues in community. EVs in cities are just as much about community health as reducing the reliance on fossil fuels. Unleaded fuel is an example of bettering community health and cars still ran fine on it.

My government subsidises diesel, gas, and coal, so to subsidise renewables is no different. It drops millions on defence in a way I don't think is great, gives tax relief to the wealthy so their wealth supposedly trickles down instead of the other way, and allows large national and international companies to operate tax free. The EV v Diesel debate I struggle to see why its so, its just how it is. Still I don't see the government as evil, as they are trying to turn an economy that is intrenched in fossil fuels, tradition, and change is always resisted.

Classic example is I am happily use a smart phone which I understand came about from the US government subsidising Apple in its product development. Sceptics thought it was going to be the end of the world corrupting minds, starting fires, create mass brain cancer, and again the rare mineral debate. But most of us now have one and think nothing off it. Furthermore would not give it up and go back to pay phones, wall phones, and answering machines as the smart phone is just good. We much prefer the convenance and practicality of it, but the privatised network to make it all happen was subsidised by government. Well in my country anyway.

 

Will you explain the gap between the two statements that seem contradictory:

"The war production board said "no more diesel locomotives" for a couple three years."

And

"The switch probably would have happened anyways, but it happened much faster due to government intervention."

How did government tapping the brakes speed up the process? By restraining commercial applications in favor of governmental?

 

I won't argue with the ABS except to say it has made drivers more dangerous overall..
Seat belts I don't use and never have
Air bags have thier own issues and many of them. Look how many died from thier problems before recalls
Traction controll? What a joke! To this day every single car with it has had issues getting around in bad weather but if I turn it off there is less issue. Notice I say less issue not no issue. That's because unless the system is designed to work properly as 4 wheel drive should I still can't make it up the freeking hill.
Electronic stability controll? I question this because every car, truck, suv we owned to date has benefited from it being permenately turned off.
Back up camera? Still don't have a use for one and don't see it as a necessary.
Crumple Zones? Yep I think its a good Idea with poor implementation. Dont think your car should fold up on such minor accidents. My wife's car is basically totalled from one deere and don't think the deere even died!
My old Chevy. Dodge,Ford, Oldsmobile and even my AMC hit deere at much higher speeds and needed far less repair.
So if you want to pay for all that crap I say good go ahead but why do you want to force it on others.
You know my 64 dodge still gets down the road with no issues, the speed limit is still the same and your rolling computerized pieces of crap still have issues keeping up.