Ford eating its own to feed EVs...

[Ricky]

On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 1:47:03 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 8/23/2022 12:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/22/2022 09:51 PM, bitrex wrote:
On 8/22/2022 2:03 PM, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV
expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2


\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and
diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of
the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high
development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the
business is a very bad idea.

People who like old cars and trucks tend to prefer to buy old cars and
trucks. They don\'t like the new gas Camaro, they don\'t like the new gas
Corvette, they don\'t like the new F-150, either.


Back in the day I traded a \'80 Camaro in on an \'82 Firebird. A trunk big
enough for two dead mice or a hatchback? No brainer. If the new Camaro
was a hatch, I\'d be interested. As is, I drive a Toyota hatch. The rear
seats got folded down the day I bought it and it became a mini-pickup.
Unlike the Cowboy Cadillac, you don\'t need a tonneau cover to keep your
powder dry.


Last I checked out the late-model Camaro it had a decent-sized trunk,
but the rear windows were like tank slits. Pretty dreadful visibility.
They\'ve made it a little better more recently I think.

Like the model X... hit the accelerator hard and you never have to worry with what\'s behind you. They\'ll never catch up.

One thing Ford and GM do tend to offer is a lot customization options on
their vehicles, though how many people special-order them vs just buy
whatever is on the lot I don\'t know.

You can use their configuration to design some nice cars/grotesque
monstrosities, depending on one\'s artistic sense:

https://imgur.com/a/AaozSSw

I had fun designing it in the \"sim\" but at 43 I think I\'m already too
old to feel comfortable driving a car this flashy around town

I think you mean not quite old enough! Wait until you hit your 50s.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ricky]

On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 4:39:13 PM UTC-4, a a wrote:

On Tuesday, 23 August 2022 at 20:09:10 UTC+2, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 10:58:41 AM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
tirsdag den 23. august 2022 kl. 19.47.03 UTC+2 skrev bitrex:
On 8/23/2022 12:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/22/2022 09:51 PM, bitrex wrote:
On 8/22/2022 2:03 PM, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV
expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2


\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and
diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of
the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high
development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the
business is a very bad idea.

People who like old cars and trucks tend to prefer to buy old cars and
trucks. They don\'t like the new gas Camaro, they don\'t like the new gas
Corvette, they don\'t like the new F-150, either.


Back in the day I traded a \'80 Camaro in on an \'82 Firebird. A trunk big
enough for two dead mice or a hatchback? No brainer. If the new Camaro
was a hatch, I\'d be interested. As is, I drive a Toyota hatch. The rear
seats got folded down the day I bought it and it became a mini-pickup.
Unlike the Cowboy Cadillac, you don\'t need a tonneau cover to keep your
powder dry.


Last I checked out the late-model Camaro it had a decent-sized trunk,
but the rear windows were like tank slits. Pretty dreadful visibility.
They\'ve made it a little better more recently I think.
with mirrors on both sides and maybe a rear view cam for parking, what do you even need a rear window for?
I wish there is a button to enable rear view cam without putting it in \'R\'. Sometimes i want to look at who\'s following me.
I use front/rear cameras window installed to the default read view window
If touch screen feature is enabled, you can select front/rear camera with one clic k
and get full window view.


I have developed 4-8 camera surround set up for a car,
run on small 12V PC computer with 4 or 8 usb inputs, since I use usb web cams

Surround view is supported by web html5 application
and you can select a number of preselected multi cameras setups

Surround 360 view is supported by 7 inch monitor or any touch screen , featuring video input

Kinda like having a Tesla. It will watch over your car too!
https://images.carpages.ca/inventory/8930482.320534995?w=1280&h=960&q=75&fit=max&s=ba359ef38682f9f97c5586c2b114e281

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[rbowman]

On 08/23/2022 11:46 AM, bitrex wrote:

Last I checked out the late-model Camaro it had a decent-sized trunk,
but the rear windows were like tank slits. Pretty dreadful visibility.
They\'ve made it a little better more recently I think.

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/chevrolet/camaro/interior

\"At 9.1 cubic feet, the Camaro coupe\'s trunk has not only the smallest
volume in the segment, but it also has a tiny opening and a high
liftover height. If you ever wondered why tourists who rent Camaro
convertibles put their suitcases in the back seat, this is why.\"

The Dodge wins the trunk competition. I had a \'73 Mustang which was the
last year for the \'big\' Gen 1 Mustangs. I took a friend grocery shopping
and as we stood there with an overflowing cart contemplating the trunk
she said \"This isn\'t the sort of car a guy interested in a woman with
kids drives.\" She was right.

After the shrunken piece of crap that was the Mustang II came out I
switched to a Camaro. The Gen 2 Camaros were still real cars. When the
Gen 3 hatchbacks came out I went with the Firebird. The Firebirds had
popup headlights and was the most aerodynamic model GM produced to that
point. It claimed a Cd of .31 which is still pretty good.

 

[rbowman]

On 08/23/2022 11:51 AM, bitrex wrote:

You can factory-order some huge rip-roaring V8s for the Camaro these
days but the price increases substantially until you\'re getting into
Corvette-money and it\'s like why put a Corvette engine in a Camaro when
you can just get the Corvette for not too much more.

I haven\'t looked at Corvettes in years but the last time I did it was
cramped. I had a \'62 AH Sprite which was one of the smallest cars made
and I had more leg room.

Dodge put smaller V8s in their muscle cars and sold them for less money
and their sales did better I believe, their marketing understood that
people wanted the sizzle and didn\'t care so much about the steak.

If I want acceleration, I\'ve got the bikes. Cars are something with a
roof, windows, and a heater to drive in the winter or use for
laundry/CostCo runs. Of the three I like the Challenger\'s looks but I
don\'t need a SRT Hellcat. A VStrom will do 0 to 60 in 3.6 seconds one
hell of a lot cheaper. Okay, it will only do 115 but you can only
stretch the Highway Patrol\'s sense of humor just so far.

 

[rbowman]

On 08/23/2022 11:58 AM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

tirsdag den 23. august 2022 kl. 19.47.03 UTC+2 skrev bitrex:
On 8/23/2022 12:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/22/2022 09:51 PM, bitrex wrote:
On 8/22/2022 2:03 PM, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV
expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2


\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and
diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of
the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high
development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the
business is a very bad idea.

People who like old cars and trucks tend to prefer to buy old cars and
trucks. They don\'t like the new gas Camaro, they don\'t like the new gas
Corvette, they don\'t like the new F-150, either.


Back in the day I traded a \'80 Camaro in on an \'82 Firebird. A trunk big
enough for two dead mice or a hatchback? No brainer. If the new Camaro
was a hatch, I\'d be interested. As is, I drive a Toyota hatch. The rear
seats got folded down the day I bought it and it became a mini-pickup.
Unlike the Cowboy Cadillac, you don\'t need a tonneau cover to keep your
powder dry.


Last I checked out the late-model Camaro it had a decent-sized trunk,
but the rear windows were like tank slits. Pretty dreadful visibility.
They\'ve made it a little better more recently I think.

with mirrors on both sides and maybe a rear view cam for parking, what do you even need a rear window for?

I sometimes look at the inside mirror because it\'s there but I don\'t use
it for parking. The cam is mostly so I don\'t run over the cat.

 

[server]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
<soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

This is interesting:

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/08/25/heres_california_flooring_it_to_the_clean_energy_future__with_its_transmission_slipping_badly_849556.html

There is also a war here on natural gas; some cities have outlawed it
in new construction. The electric grid could well collapse, as it is
in some greenie european countries.

Politicians make bad electrical engineers.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 1:00:48 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now due to low sales and very high development costs,

Gnatguy would know ... Elon Musk seems to be making a lot of money out of them, but Gnatguy knows better.

>> but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea..

In Gnatguy\'s ever-so-expert opinion.

This is interesting:

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/08/25/heres_california_flooring_it_to_the_clean_energy_future__with_its_transmission_slipping_badly_849556.html

Not really. The process of getting everything set up to handle a different kind of generation system is bound to be messy.

There is also a war here on natural gas; some cities have outlawed it in new construction. The electric grid could well collapse, as it is in some greenie european countries.

Really? The European electricity grid is under stress because the Russians are withholding natural gas as a political weapon. That hasn\'t got much to do with green political parties, who have always wanted to make their countries less dependent on fossil carbon fuels, of which natural gas is one.

> Politicians make bad electrical engineers.

Probably true, but irrelevant. Politicians direct other people to hire electrical engineers to change the grid to suit the energy sources that work for the country as a whole. With the Russians throttling natural gas supplies for political ends, buying more natural gas isn\'t a great idea.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:30:48 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 1:00:48 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now due to low sales and very high development costs,

Gnatguy would know ... Elon Musk seems to be making a lot of money out of them, but Gnatguy knows better.

Hey Bozo, we are talking about FORD here, not Tesla (that\'s a different conversation). And it IS NOT profitable yet at Ford - the memo concerning the 3,000 layoffs says so directly.

but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
In Gnatguy\'s ever-so-expert opinion.

It is an obvious conclusion to anyone with a brain. OH, that leaves you out!

This is interesting:

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/08/25/heres_california_flooring_it_to_the_clean_energy_future__with_its_transmission_slipping_badly_849556.html
Not really. The process of getting everything set up to handle a different kind of generation system is bound to be messy.

Bozo calls the reality of not meeting the senile pervert Lyin\' Biden\'s unrealistic energy goals \"messy.\" No, it just AIN\'T GONNA HAPPEN according to this report:
https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/decarbonising-us-power-grid-may-cost-us$4.5-trillion/

There is also a war here on natural gas; some cities have outlawed it in new construction. The electric grid could well collapse, as it is in some greenie european countries.
Really? The European electricity grid is under stress because the Russians are withholding natural gas as a political weapon. That hasn\'t got much to do with green political parties, who have always wanted to make their countries less dependent on fossil carbon fuels, of which natural gas is one.

So WHY put it under MORE stress by decommissioning generation plants w/o a plan in place to replace them?

Politicians make bad electrical engineers.
Probably true, but irrelevant. Politicians direct other people to hire electrical engineers to change the grid to suit the energy sources that work for the country as a whole. With the Russians throttling natural gas supplies for political ends, buying more natural gas isn\'t a great idea.

Not only are politicians bad engineers, they are also bad planners and managers. The only thing they ARE good at is blaming others for their failings. From that article:

\"The government’s answer is more taxpayer funding for transmission, although it will take at least 10-15 years to develop a new project, according to the Transmission Agency of Northern California, a group of publicly owned utilities in the state.

That’s been tried before: In 2011, the Obama administration created the Rapid Response Team for Transmission, which included five projects in the West. One is under way, while the others have been cancelled or delayed.. A website created to track the projects has been defunct for years. \"

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 9:14:47 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

> ...\"suggestions\" are exactly that, suggestions, or, more accurately, GUESSES. I specifically stated PROOFS.

Climate change concerns arise from evidence, observations, reasoning, etc. That\'s \"science\", and
it never involves proofs. Proofs are in mathematics (and mathematics doesn\'t address
issues like climate change or anthropogenesis).

So, you can be unconvinced forever, disconnected thus from the reality around you. Except
that it\'s REAL, climate is, and it will always be around you.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 2:01:07 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 8:30:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 1, 2022 at 12:58:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 12:53:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 2:14:47 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 7:32:41 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 2:10:33 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2022 at 8:00:02 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 11:21:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:26:14 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 10:26:35 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:30:48 AM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 1:00:48 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

Wrong. Popper claims that the strongest possible scientific assertion is that a particular hypothesis hasn\'t been falsified yet.

The hypothesis that anthropogenic global warming is real and getting worse has been extensively tested, and has yet to falsified. It\'s way beyond any kind of guess.

Climate change denial propaganda does lie a lot about the outcomes of some of the attempts to falsify the hypothesis. and you do seem to be the kind of gullible twit who doesn\'t notice when he gets lied to. You also like Donald Trump, who also lies a lot.

Again, Bozo, you don\'t produce PROOFS of these bizarre hypotheses - it IS NOT up to me to PROVE THEM WRONG.

You can\'t prove a hypothesis - you can only falsify it. It is up to you to falsify it if you want to claim that it is wrong.

> No one has produced ANY scientific evidence linking CO2 to global warming, just a coincidental CO2 rise as temperatures rose, and even that is flawed.

There\'s actually loads of scientific evidence linking rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere to rising temperatures at the surface of the earth. and a detailed explanation of the way this works. You don\'t seem to be able to understand any of it.

The temperature rise isn\'t in any way \"coincidental\". There are well-worked out links along every step in the path. The climate change denial propaganda you seem to be relying on ignores all of this, and you are too dim to realise that you are being lied to.

Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years. The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.
Violators will be sentenced to hard labor planting trees.

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 12:08:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 2:01:07 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 8:30:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 1, 2022 at 12:58:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 12:53:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 2:14:47 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 7:32:41 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 2:10:33 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2022 at 8:00:02 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 11:21:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:26:14 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 10:26:35 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:30:48 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 1:00:48 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
snip
Wrong. Popper claims that the strongest possible scientific assertion is that a particular hypothesis hasn\'t been falsified yet.

The hypothesis that anthropogenic global warming is real and getting worse has been extensively tested, and has yet to falsified. It\'s way beyond any kind of guess.

Climate change denial propaganda does lie a lot about the outcomes of some of the attempts to falsify the hypothesis. and you do seem to be the kind of gullible twit who doesn\'t notice when he gets lied to. You also like Donald Trump, who also lies a lot.

Again, Bozo, you don\'t produce PROOFS of these bizarre hypotheses - it IS NOT up to me to PROVE THEM WRONG.
You can\'t prove a hypothesis - you can only falsify it. It is up to you to falsify it if you want to claim that it is wrong.
No one has produced ANY scientific evidence linking CO2 to global warming, just a coincidental CO2 rise as temperatures rose, and even that is flawed.
There\'s actually loads of scientific evidence linking rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere to rising temperatures at the surface of the earth. and a detailed explanation of the way this works. You don\'t seem to be able to understand any of it.

If there is then PRODUCE IT!

The temperature rise isn\'t in any way \"coincidental\". There are well-worked out links along every step in the path. The climate change denial propaganda you seem to be relying on ignores all of this, and you are too dim to realise that you are being lied to.

Bill Sloman, Sydney

Sorry Bozo, but I don\'t have to prove that climate change because of anthropogenic causes - it is up to you blowhards to prove that it IS.

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 9:43:45 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years. The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.
Violators will be sentenced to hard labor planting trees.

No, you THINK it is. The actual handwriting on the wall is this greening of the economy will produce a severe backlash. When you tell a single mom with 3 kids that she has to junk her perfectly good ICE car and buy a $70k electric when she is only earning $20/hr she will REVOLT. Now, multiply that by ONE HUNDRED MILLION!

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 9:55:25 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 9:43:45 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years. The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.
Violators will be sentenced to hard labor planting trees.
No, you THINK it is. The actual handwriting on the wall is this greening of the economy will produce a severe backlash. When you tell a single mom with 3 kids that she has to junk her perfectly good ICE car and buy a $70k electric when she is only earning $20/hr she will REVOLT. Now, multiply that by ONE HUNDRED MILLION!

She either won\'t be able to buy gasoline or it will very expensive.

What is that woman doing with three kids anyway?

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years.

Hilarious.

The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.

Aircraft? Short flights with no passengers maybe.

 

[Mike Monett VE3BTI]

John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV
expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-a
bout-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos
2 \"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and
diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of
the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high
development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the
business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be
banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about
three years.

Hilarious.

The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be
now as later. Aircraft and boats will be next.

Aircraft? Short flights with no passengers maybe.

1. California, the country’s most populous state and the center of U.S. car
culture, is banning the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles starting in
2035, marking a historic step in the state’s battle against climate change.

The rule, issued by the California Air Resources Board on Thursday, will
force automakers to speed up production of cleaner vehicles beginning in
2026 until sales of only zero-emission cars, pickup trucks and SUVs are
allowed in the state.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/25/california-bans-the-sale-of-new-gas-
powered-cars-by-2035.html

2. Ford, GM, Mercedes, Volvo, BYD, JLR Commit To End ICE Production By 2040

https://www.carscoops.com/2021/11/ford-gm-mercedes-volvo-byd-jlr-commit-to-
end-ice-production-by-2040/

3. World\'s first commercial electric plane completes point-to-point flight

https://newatlas.com/aircraft/worlds-first-commercial-electric-plane-
harbour-air/

4. Electric Planes Are Coming Sooner Than You Think

Electric aviation is no flight of fancy: Leading airlines like United and
EasyJet are onboard as early adopters, with the first U.S. commercial
routes slated for 2026.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/electric-planes-are-coming-sooner-than-you-
think

A huge investment in batteries is paying off:

5. NEW Sodium solid state batteries could solve our lithium crisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b63e-Om1Zz0

6. NEW Sulfur batteries - 1,000 mile EV range GAME changer!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEIHtxWO2Qw

7. NEW GENERATION LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES

In lithium-ion (li-ion) batteries, energy storage and release is provided
by the movement of lithium ions from the positive to the negative electrode
back and forth via the electrolyte. In this technology, the positive
electrode acts as the initial lithium source and the negative electrode as
the host for lithium. Several chemistries are gathered under the name of
li-ion batteries, as the result of decades of selection and optimization
close to perfection of positive and negative active materials. Lithiated
metal oxides or phosphates are the most common material used as present
positive materials. Graphite, but also graphite/silicon or lithiated
titanium oxides are used as negative materials.

With actual materials and cell designs, li-ion technology is expected to
reach an energy limit in the next coming years. Nevertheless, very recent
discoveries of new families of disruptive active materials should unlock
present limits. These innovative compounds can store more lithium in
positive and negative electrodes and will allow for the first time to
combine energy and power. In addition, with these new compounds, the
scarcity and criticality of raw materials are also taken into account.

What are its advantages?

Today, among all the state-of-the-art storage technologies, li-ion battery
technology allows the highest level of energy density. Performances such as
fast charge or temperature operating window (-50°C up to 125°C) can be
fine-tuned by the large choice of cell design and chemistries. Furthermore,
li-ion batteries display additional advantages such as very low self-
discharge and very long lifetime and cycling performances, typically
thousands of charging/discharging cycles.

When can we expect it?

New generation of advanced li-ion batteries is expected to be deployed
before the first generation of solid state batteries. They’ll be ideal for
use in applications such as Energy Storage Systems for renewables and
transportation (marine, railways, aviation and off road mobility) where
high energy, high power and safety is mandatory.

LITHIUM-SULFUR BATTERIES

In li-ion batteries, the lithium ions are stored in active materials acting
as stable host structures during charge and discharge. In lithium-sulfur
(Li-S) batteries, there are no host structures. While discharging, the
lithium anode is consumed and sulfur transformed into a variety of chemical
compounds; during charging, the reverse process takes place.
What are its advantages?

A Li-S battery uses very light active materials: sulfur in the positive
electrode and metallic lithium as the negative electrode. This is why its
theoretical energy density is extraordinarily high: four times greater than
that of lithium-ion. That makes it a good fit for the aviation and space
industries.

Saft has selected and favoured the most promising Li-S technology based on
solid state electrolyte. This technical path brings very high energy
density, long life and overcomes the main drawbacks of the liquid based Li-
S (limited life, high selfdischarge, …).

Furthermore, this technology is supplementary to solid state lithium-ion
thanks to its superior gravimetric energy density (+30% at stake in Wh/kg).
When can we expect it?

Major technology barriers have already been overcome and the maturity level
is progressing very quickly towards full scale prototypes.

For applications requiring long battery life, this technology is expected
to reach the market just after solid state lithium-ion.

SOLID STATE BATTERIES

Solid state batteries represent a paradigm shift in terms of technology. In
modern li-ion batteries, ions move from one electrode to another across the
liquid electrolyte (also called ionic conductivity). In all-solid state
batteries, the liquid electrolyte is replaced by a solid compound which
nevertheless allows lithium ions to migrate within it. This concept is far
from new, but over the past 10 years – thanks to intensive worldwide
research – new families of solid electrolytes have been discovered with
very high ionic conductivity, similar to liquid electrolyte, allowing this
particular technological barrier to be overcome.

Today, Saft Research & Development efforts focus on 2 main material types:
polymers and inorganic compounds, aiming the synergy of the physico-
chemical properties such as processability, stability, conductivity …

What are its advantages?

The first huge advantage is a marked improvement in safety at cell and
battery levels: solid electrolytes are non-flammable when heated, unlike
their liquid counterparts. Second, it permits the use of innovative, high-
voltage high-capacity materials, enabling denser, lighter batteries with
better shelf-life as a result of reduced self-discharge. Moreover, at
system level, it will bring additional advantages such as simplified
mechanics as well as thermal and safety management.

As the batteries can exhibit a high power-to-weight ratio, they may be
ideal for use in electric vehicles.

When can we expect it?

Several kinds of all-solid state batteries are likely to come to market as
technological progress continues. The first will be solid state batteries
with graphite-based anodes, bringing improved energy performance and
safety. In time, lighter solid state battery technologies using a metallic
lithium anode should become commercially available.

https://www.saftbatteries.com/media-resources/our-stories/three-battery-
technologies-could-power-future

- and so on...



--
MRM

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 12:43:08 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years.

Hilarious.

John Larkin is easily amused.

The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.

Aircraft? Short flights with no passengers maybe.

Short flights do seem to be whats on offer. Passengers are perfectly practical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_aircraft

\"A demonstrator for the German Scylax E10 10-seater should fly in 2022. It should be used by FLN Frisia Luftverkehr to connect East Frisian islands with its 300 km (160 nmi) range and 300 m (980 ft) short takeoff and landing distance.\"

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 7:29:45 PM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 9:55:25 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 9:43:45 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
\"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about three years. The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be now as later.
Aircraft and boats will be next.
Violators will be sentenced to hard labor planting trees.
No, you THINK it is. The actual handwriting on the wall is this greening of the economy will produce a severe backlash. When you tell a single mom with 3 kids that she has to junk her perfectly good ICE car and buy a $70k electric when she is only earning $20/hr she will REVOLT. Now, multiply that by ONE HUNDRED MILLION!
She either won\'t be able to buy gasoline or it will very expensive.
Gas doesn\'t cost $70k/gal

What is that woman doing with three kids anyway?

What, are you a sexist? Sure sounds like it.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 11:51:36 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 12:08:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 2:01:07 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 8:30:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 1, 2022 at 12:58:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 12:53:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 2:14:47 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 7:32:41 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 2:10:33 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2022 at 8:00:02 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 11:21:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:26:14 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 10:26:35 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:30:48 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 1:00:48 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
snip
Wrong. Popper claims that the strongest possible scientific assertion is that a particular hypothesis hasn\'t been falsified yet.

The hypothesis that anthropogenic global warming is real and getting worse has been extensively tested, and has yet to falsified. It\'s way beyond any kind of guess.

Climate change denial propaganda does lie a lot about the outcomes of some of the attempts to falsify the hypothesis. and you do seem to be the kind of gullible twit who doesn\'t notice when he gets lied to. You also like Donald Trump, who also lies a lot.

Again, Bozo, you don\'t produce PROOFS of these bizarre hypotheses - it IS NOT up to me to PROVE THEM WRONG.
You can\'t prove a hypothesis - you can only falsify it. It is up to you to falsify it if you want to claim that it is wrong.
No one has produced ANY scientific evidence linking CO2 to global warming, just a coincidental CO2 rise as temperatures rose, and even that is flawed.
There\'s actually loads of scientific evidence linking rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere to rising temperatures at the surface of the earth. and a detailed explanation of the way this works. You don\'t seem to be able to understand any of it.

If there is then PRODUCE IT!

https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

I\'ve pointed you at this before, but whatever education you got at your jerkwater college doesn\'t seem to have been good enough to let you take advantage of it.

The temperature rise isn\'t in any way \"coincidental\". There are well-worked out links along every step in the path. The climate change denial propaganda you seem to be relying on ignores all of this, and you are too dim to realise that you are being lied to.

Sorry Bill, but I don\'t have to prove that climate change because of anthropogenic causes - it is up to you blowhards to prove that it IS.

That has been done, or \"proved\" to the extent that a scientific hypothesis can be said to be proven . The fact that you can\'t understand the evidence is your problem - not ours. A gibbering idiot who can\'t find his bottom with both hands isn\'t easy to educate, and it\'s sufficient to point out that he is an idiot, and tell him to go away.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 8:33:40 PM UTC-7, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:

John Larkin <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV
expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-a
bout-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos
2 \"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and
diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of
the business must operate more efficiently.\"

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high
development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the
business is a very bad idea.

The handwriting is on the wall: the internal combustion engine will be
banned from all new car sales nationwide, if not worldwide, in about
three years.

Hilarious.

The auto industry conversion to EV has to be done, it might as well be
now as later. Aircraft and boats will be next.

Aircraft? Short flights with no passengers maybe.
1. California, the country’s most populous state and the center of U.S. car
culture, is banning the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles starting in
2035, marking a historic step in the state’s battle against climate change.

That policy will have, exactly, a ZERO impact on climate change, which isn\'t even due to CO2.

The rule, issued by the California Air Resources Board on Thursday, will
force automakers to speed up production of cleaner vehicles beginning in
2026 until sales of only zero-emission cars, pickup trucks and SUVs are
allowed in the state.

That policy will colapse under its OWN WEIGHT when the CA grid fails from overload. They are ALREADY telling people not to charge their electric cars - what happens when there are 50 to 100 times more cars? Also, the cars will become affordable ONLY to billionaires when the price of lithium goes 10x..

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/25/california-bans-the-sale-of-new-gas-
powered-cars-by-2035.html

2. Ford, GM, Mercedes, Volvo, BYD, JLR Commit To End ICE Production By 2040

https://www.carscoops.com/2021/11/ford-gm-mercedes-volvo-byd-jlr-commit-to-
end-ice-production-by-2040/

I guess I will be buying a Toyota diesel truck.

3. World\'s first commercial electric plane completes point-to-point flight

https://newatlas.com/aircraft/worlds-first-commercial-electric-plane-
harbour-air/

So, you will be travelling cross country by train, and forget about going to Europe (even by ship).

4. Electric Planes Are Coming Sooner Than You Think

Electric aviation is no flight of fancy: Leading airlines like United and
EasyJet are onboard as early adopters, with the first U.S. commercial
routes slated for 2026.

HA HA HA HA! Do a back of the envelop calculation of how many kg of batteries it will take to fly a 737 coast to coast.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/electric-planes-are-coming-sooner-than-you-
think

A huge investment in batteries is paying off:

5. NEW Sodium solid state batteries could solve our lithium crisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b63e-Om1Zz0

Get back to me when you can actually buy one.

6. NEW Sulfur batteries - 1,000 mile EV range GAME changer!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEIHtxWO2Qw

Ditto.

7. NEW GENERATION LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES

In lithium-ion (li-ion) batteries, energy storage and release is provided
by the movement of lithium ions from the positive to the negative electrode
back and forth via the electrolyte. In this technology, the positive
electrode acts as the initial lithium source and the negative electrode as
the host for lithium. Several chemistries are gathered under the name of
li-ion batteries, as the result of decades of selection and optimization
close to perfection of positive and negative active materials. Lithiated
metal oxides or phosphates are the most common material used as present
positive materials. Graphite, but also graphite/silicon or lithiated
titanium oxides are used as negative materials.

With actual materials and cell designs, li-ion technology is expected to
reach an energy limit in the next coming years. Nevertheless, very recent
discoveries of new families of disruptive active materials should unlock
present limits. These innovative compounds can store more lithium in
positive and negative electrodes and will allow for the first time to
combine energy and power. In addition, with these new compounds, the
scarcity and criticality of raw materials are also taken into account.

What are its advantages?

Today, among all the state-of-the-art storage technologies, li-ion battery
technology allows the highest level of energy density. Performances such as
fast charge or temperature operating window (-50°C up to 125°C) can be
fine-tuned by the large choice of cell design and chemistries. Furthermore,
li-ion batteries display additional advantages such as very low self-
discharge and very long lifetime and cycling performances, typically
thousands of charging/discharging cycles.

When can we expect it?

New generation of advanced li-ion batteries is expected to be deployed
before the first generation of solid state batteries. They’ll be ideal for
use in applications such as Energy Storage Systems for renewables and
transportation (marine, railways, aviation and off road mobility) where
high energy, high power and safety is mandatory.

HOW MUCH do you think energy densities will increase (be sure not to laugh)? Then, repeat the 737 calculation.

LITHIUM-SULFUR BATTERIES

In li-ion batteries, the lithium ions are stored in active materials acting
as stable host structures during charge and discharge. In lithium-sulfur
(Li-S) batteries, there are no host structures. While discharging, the
lithium anode is consumed and sulfur transformed into a variety of chemical
compounds; during charging, the reverse process takes place.
What are its advantages?

A Li-S battery uses very light active materials: sulfur in the positive
electrode and metallic lithium as the negative electrode. This is why its
theoretical energy density is extraordinarily high: four times greater than
that of lithium-ion. That makes it a good fit for the aviation and space
industries.

Saft has selected and favoured the most promising Li-S technology based on
solid state electrolyte. This technical path brings very high energy
density, long life and overcomes the main drawbacks of the liquid based Li-
S (limited life, high selfdischarge, …).

Furthermore, this technology is supplementary to solid state lithium-ion
thanks to its superior gravimetric energy density (+30% at stake in Wh/kg).
When can we expect it?

Major technology barriers have already been overcome and the maturity level
is progressing very quickly towards full scale prototypes.

For applications requiring long battery life, this technology is expected
to reach the market just after solid state lithium-ion.

Ditto.

SOLID STATE BATTERIES

Solid state batteries represent a paradigm shift in terms of technology. In
modern li-ion batteries, ions move from one electrode to another across the
liquid electrolyte (also called ionic conductivity). In all-solid state
batteries, the liquid electrolyte is replaced by a solid compound which
nevertheless allows lithium ions to migrate within it. This concept is far
from new, but over the past 10 years – thanks to intensive worldwide
research – new families of solid electrolytes have been discovered with
very high ionic conductivity, similar to liquid electrolyte, allowing this
particular technological barrier to be overcome.

Today, Saft Research & Development efforts focus on 2 main material types:
polymers and inorganic compounds, aiming the synergy of the physico-
chemical properties such as processability, stability, conductivity …

What are its advantages?

The first huge advantage is a marked improvement in safety at cell and
battery levels: solid electrolytes are non-flammable when heated, unlike
their liquid counterparts. Second, it permits the use of innovative, high-
voltage high-capacity materials, enabling denser, lighter batteries with
better shelf-life as a result of reduced self-discharge. Moreover, at
system level, it will bring additional advantages such as simplified
mechanics as well as thermal and safety management.

As the batteries can exhibit a high power-to-weight ratio, they may be
ideal for use in electric vehicles.

When can we expect it?

Several kinds of all-solid state batteries are likely to come to market as
technological progress continues. The first will be solid state batteries
with graphite-based anodes, bringing improved energy performance and
safety. In time, lighter solid state battery technologies using a metallic
lithium anode should become commercially available.

https://www.saftbatteries.com/media-resources/our-stories/three-battery-
technologies-could-power-future

Ditto squared.

- and so on...



--
MRM