The case for smaller batteries in more efficient vehicles

[MiguelAznar]

Vice published an article making the environmental case for focusing manufacture on smaller batteries in more efficient vehicles: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ab...batteries-in-the-world-to-power-our-huge-cars

They make several assumptions:

“…Rivian R1T and Cybertruck get 70” eMPG. Is that known yet for the Cybertruck?

“…The Cybertruck is engineered to look strange so people talk about it.” This site has countless posts on form following function, the most attractive feature for many of us, so few of us may agree with this.

These two items aside, the article makes a good environmental case for working within current battery production limits by making more cars that are efficient than fewer trucks that are not. I try to be gentle on the environment, I’ve never owned a truck, and I still want “my” Cybertruck.

Sponsored

 

[firsttruck]

Yup, the best thing for the environment is not wasting resources.

If the real world was transformed in to the ideal world, millions of people who bought trucks for style but very rarely used them as trucks would stop.

The probable only real world future solution is when FSD & robotaxi is standard, most people won't own a car or truck at all and there would be robotaxi cars, robotaxi vans, robotaxi Cybertrucks.

 

[Ogre]

“…The Cybertruck is engineered to look strange so people talk about it.” This site has countless posts on form following function, the most attractive feature for many of us, so few of us may agree with this.

Read the article early and that comment kind of pissed me off. Tesla dominates the efficiency charts. The author sort of presumes they will suddenly fail to make an efficient truck?

When someone fills in the unknowns based on their own preconceptions it makes me question their motivations. Odd that the Hummer—king of incomprehensible EV inefficiency isn’t mentioned. Also odd that somehow their comparison painted Ford in a better light than Tesla or Rivian in spite of Ford being the likely least efficient of the 3.

Some good underlying points surrounded by poor fact gathering or biased sourcing.

 

[rr6013]

Cockamamie stories about battery size - smaller the better - are “Hybrid” media embeds promoting PC fear and galvanizing loyalty to the OEM’s transition narrative mixing a little battery and a lotta gas.

It’s an easy sell. Hybrids rack up mileage. But for every Hybrid sold it extends petroleum detrimental reliance a further 20yr. That 20yr. vehicle life continues AGW for the privilege of having tiny batteries that make you feel warm and cozy knowing how smart it was buying “eco”.

All hybrids are sham. And the sooner Li big batteries replace those ICE petroleum engines, quicker the planet stops warming. Don’t think every drop of gas you burn isn’t absorbed into the ocean heat sink. Oceans will overshoot warming until the end of this century. That’s true were net-zero CO2 were to end global warming today. SO do the maths.

 

[MiguelAznar]

Odd that the Hummer—king of incomprehensible EV inefficiency isn’t mentioned.

The Hummer gets no love in this article:

“…the Hummer EV even more so (its battery pack is a stupid 210 kWh, which would have powered my 1,000 square foot apartment for all of last month on a single charge, but conspicuous overconsumption is a Hummer’s whole deal)…A Hummer EV gets an eMPG of 47, worse than a Prius hybrid…”

 

[Crissa]

Combined MPGe
48 Hummer EV
68 Ford Lightning
70 Rivian R1T

Cybertruck will, from it's design, exceed these. It will have a smaller cross section, it defaults to a 'fastback' shape, and a lighter battery pack, a lighter frame. Because each of those would do better if they had any single one of those, let alone all four.

-Crissa

 

[JBee]

On any other day of the week I'd take both here in Australia or the US. Ford Australia is finally bringing in F-Trucks soon again, so there's a good chance we'll see a Lightning here too now.

 

[HaulingAss]

Vice published an article making the environmental case for focusing manufacture on smaller batteries in more efficient vehicles: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ab...batteries-in-the-world-to-power-our-huge-cars

They make several assumptions:

“…Rivian R1T and Cybertruck get 70” eMPG. Is that known yet for the Cybertruck?

“…The Cybertruck is engineered to look strange so people talk about it.” This site has countless posts on form following function, the most attractive feature for many of us, so few of us may agree with this.

These two items aside, the article makes a good environmental case for working within current battery production limits by making more cars that are efficient than fewer trucks that are not. I try to be gentle on the environment, I’ve never owned a truck, and I still want “my” Cybertruck.

Whenever people say the world would be a better place if only automakers made smaller fuel-efficient cars instead of big SUV's and trucks Detroit always responds they have to build what the market will buy.

So, yeah, smaller more fuel efficient EV's would be nice although I'm not sure I would buy anything smaller than a Model 3 considering how many big, menacing battering rams are speeding around on our roads today.

 

[Newton]

Cockamamie stories about battery size - smaller the better - are “Hybrid” media embeds promoting PC fear and galvanizing loyalty to the OEM’s transition narrative mixing a little battery and a lotta gas.

It’s an easy sell. Hybrids rack up mileage. But for every Hybrid sold it extends petroleum detrimental reliance a further 20yr. That 20yr. vehicle life continues AGW for the privilege of having tiny batteries that make you feel warm and cozy knowing how smart it was buying “eco”.

All hybrids are sham. And the sooner Li big batteries replace those ICE petroleum engines, quicker the planet stops warming. Don’t think every drop of gas you burn isn’t absorbed into the ocean heat sink. Oceans will overshoot warming until the end of this century. That’s true were net-zero CO2 were to end global warming today. SO do the maths.

hybrids r great for now.
i think the issue is simply production EV numbers right now, I got my priusc for $15k like 3-4 years ago. I was looking hard for EV's but the best i could find was a 1st gen leaf for about the same price. not good enough since I go far places.

Im at about 10% of all miles driven in the prius being all EV, if it was a plug in hybrid it would be over 50%.
thats thousands of miles using no gas that would otherwise be from petrol.

I ended up getting a 1st gen leaf 2 years (with about 20kwh usable battery) later and it works for 80% of my needs. the prius is still in the family though, so i can use it for longer trips.

 

[John K]

The Hummer gets no love in this article:

“…the Hummer EV even more so (its battery pack is a stupid 210 kWh, which would have powered my 1,000 square foot apartment for all of last month on a single charge, but conspicuous overconsumption is a Hummer’s whole deal)…A Hummer EV gets an eMPG of 47, worse than a Prius hybrid…”

If the purchaser opened a previous hummer, 47 eMPG would feel amazing

 

[Crissa]

Whenever people say the world would be a better place if only automakers made smaller fuel-efficient cars instead of big SUV's and trucks Detroit always responds they have to build what the market will buy.

So, yeah, smaller more fuel efficient EV's would be nice although I'm not sure I would buy anything smaller than a Model 3 considering how many big, menacing battering rams are speeding around on our roads today.

Yes, they were saying that as the Model 3 ate all their sales.

Maybe they don't built what sells, but what's cheap to build.

-Crissa

 

[Ogre]

Whenever people say the world would be a better place if only automakers made smaller fuel-efficient cars instead of big SUV's and trucks Detroit always responds they have to build what the market will buy.

So, yeah, smaller more fuel efficient EV's would be nice although I'm not sure I would buy anything smaller than a Model 3 considering how many big, menacing battering rams are speeding around on our roads today.

A huge part of the car size creep is due to emissions regulations. Which have ironically driven an increase in bigger/ less efficient vehicles. (Law of unintended consequences). Bigger vehicles have slacker emissions requirements so automakers can deliver big inefficient vehicles around the same price as smaller efficient vehicles. So Detroit capitalized on this and pushed the hell out of their big ass trucks and SUVs.

With EVs, things are getting a reset. It is extremely difficult to produce a huge SUV which is affordable. Suddenly automakers are scrambling to release smaller cars which require fewer batteries.

In 5 years, it’s likely the average sized car in the US will be quite a bit smaller then it was just a few years ago. We don’t have capacity to build millions of Tahoe and Expedition sized truck SUVs. Detroit will find they can sell smaller cars or starve. Maybe a little of both.

 

[charliemagpie]

A huge part of the car size creep is due to emissions regulations. Which have ironically driven an increase in bigger/ less efficient vehicles. (Law of unintended consequences). Bigger vehicles have slacker emissions requirements so automakers can deliver big inefficient vehicles around the same price as smaller efficient vehicles. So Detroit capitalized on this and pushed the hell out of their big ass trucks and SUVs.

With EVs, things are getting a reset. It is extremely difficult to produce a huge SUV which is affordable. Suddenly automakers are scrambling to release smaller cars which require fewer batteries.

In 5 years, it’s likely the average sized car in the US will be quite a bit smaller then it was just a few years ago. We don’t have capacity to build millions of Tahoe and Expedition sized truck SUVs. Detroit will find they can sell smaller cars or starve. Maybe a little of both.

Interesting read

(Law of unintended consequences)

Stands to reason oil companies benefited by this law, and maybe the consequences weren't so unintentional.


Conspiracy theory #12573 lol

 

[HaulingAss]

Interesting read

(Law of unintended consequences)

Stands to reason oil companies benefited by this law, and maybe the consequences weren't so unintentional.


Conspiracy theory #12573 lol

I can assure you, the consequences were intentional. Obviously.

This was a gaming of the system to benefit the pocketbooks of big oil and American auto and fend off imports. It was all done under the guise of being "fair" to larger SUV's and trucks.

Strange sense of "fairness' when the goal is to cut emissions and increase health. Let's give a waiver to the cars creating most of the problem. Such is how the world works these days. Sad.

Sponsored