Forum Discussion
- Obama mandated CAFE number of 46.7 MPG by the mid twenties. Trump rolled that back and froze the number at 2020 levels or 37 MPG. California is suing the Trump administration arguing against the rollback. California installed their own rules which takes 2022 levels and increases them by 3.7% per year through 2026, or almost 50 MPG. There are credits for all-electric vehicles. No way can a company that sells mostly trucks and SUVs make that number without all-electric vehicle credits and mileage computations. Ford, along with Honda, BMW, and Volkswagen, voluntarily agreed to meet California's number. I just see Ford doing what they have to do to placate the bureaucrats. Volkswagen expects to be all-electric by that time.
Unfortunately, many states follow California emmision leads. - Just hook up a 100 kW generator in the bed...
Kidding aside, has any reliable source done a cradle to grave study on environmental effects of EVs? From the slavery kids in Africa mining rare earth metals, to the Chinese sweatshops processing them, then global shipping to build the actual cells. New infrastructure upgrades to the power generation, transmission, and distribution grid. New charging stationso, then recycling the batteries.
Are we really ahead in NET CO2 production, compared to say more economical IC solutions like small 4 cylinder 200hp diesel? SidecarFlip wrote:
valhalla360 wrote:
BB_TX wrote:
Not pointless. In spite of all the naysayers, electric is coming on a much larger scale.
So you are saying they are going to replace train engines with F150's...of course the EV version?So you are saying they are going to replace train engines with F150's...of course the EV version?
I'll bet an old 4x4 Automatic Ranger in low range could do the same test. It has no practical real world use other than a PR stunt.
They have been for years but the motive power that drives the alternator that powers the traction motors (electric) is diesel.
They have been for years? I've yet to see an F150 pulling a train when I stop at a RR crossing.
No issues with using diesel/electric train engine which is wildly different from a passenger vehicle hybrid drivetrain. The purpose and design only share the most superficial appearance of being similar.Bedlam wrote:
I was referring to the "I'll be dead so I don't give a efff" attitude. That type of attitude towards economics, the environment, government or anything else, is selfish, narrow-minded and irresponsible.
He’s just being a realist. There is no such thing as free or pollution free energy. There is always a cost and an emission - It may just be outside of your bubble.
I understand that zero emissions is a pipe dream, but even if what we do now helps a generation in 100 years, it's worth investing in. The earth is not an infinite resource and anything we can do now that might help in the future, whether that be research, development or implementation, is definitely worth trying.- He’s just being a realist. There is no such thing as free or pollution free energy. There is always a cost and an emission - It may just be outside of your bubble.
SidecarFlip wrote:
What a %@&$%#& attitude to have. Must not have grandkids, kids or any loved ones that will be around after you die.
One thing about solar and wind power, if the wind don't blow, no power. Same with solar, no sunny days, no power and the materials that make up solar panels have to be mined and that creates pollution in itself. Same with wind, Turbine tower are steel, the turbines themselves are made from metal too. That metal is produced in emissions emitting plants. Steel making is dirty, so is aluminum smelting. It's all how you look at it I guess but being 70, again I'm not concerned at all. Won't be here anyway and candidly, I don't want to be.- The electric Ford F150 wouldn't be of any use to me. I don't care if it could pull the train up the Ike Gauntlet at 80 mph. I need my tow vehicle to tow over 300 miles without stopping and and to be able to have stations at almost every interstate exit where I can fill up in about 15 minutes.
8.1 Van wrote:
Reisender wrote:
Interesting article.
https://electrek.co/2019/07/23/ford-f-150-electric-prototype-tow-train-carts/
Amazing tow strap !
Yah right. Kinda says a lot. I’m not big on these stunt things from any manufacturer. I just find it interesting that a big player has kinda seen the light and going all in on an electtic truck.Reisender wrote:
Interesting article.
https://electrek.co/2019/07/23/ford-f-150-electric-prototype-tow-train-carts/
Amazing tow strap !carringb wrote:
This is mostly true, but this is an RV site, not the grocery getter site. So yeah we are interested in a pickup as a usable vehicle for our needs. And last time I watched TV the pickup commercials were geared toward macho posturing, not grocery getting.fj12ryder wrote:
Big deal, why didn't they show a real world scenario: hook that pickup to a 7,000 lb. trailer, and tow it non-stop for 400 miles, maybe even 300 miles, at highway speeds with the AC running and a couple people in the cab. Then pull into a campground, set up, and go eat and do some sightseeing. Maybe then we'd see how usable it really is.
In my mind that would be a test that would show realistically what it could do. I don't know many people who pull a train car behind them. Show what it could do in every day usage.
Let's be real though. This makes up what percentage of pickup owners? 5% maybe? I suspect it's probably even lower than that.
For typical jobsite use, even 150 miles when towing would be many times more than it needs. And since most light trucks are just fancy grocery getters, a 300 mile non-towing range would cover all their commuting needs and then some.
