• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Power your Full-Sized Pickup Truck from the Sun

Media_Truth said:
Not at all - the Tacoma price ranges from $27K to $46K. The Rivian, with the small battery system (230-mile range), comes in at $60K. The Federal Tax credit on the Rivian is $7500. My state of Colorado gives an additional $5K tax credit. Now you're down to $47,500, right in the ballpark of the Tacoma. BTW - I took both of these these tax credits this year, with my Volt.

Think of it - no gasoline bills to boot!!!
Click to expand...


Base price for the Tacoma is $27,000.

Base price for the Rivian is $69,000.

2019 Rivian Cars | Models and Prices | Car and Driver

It doesn't matter whether they give you $12,000 tax credit, you still have to pay $69,000 for the base model.
A tax credit does not reduce the price of the vehicle.
 
joko104 said:
One of them many lies told about EVs is that they are "green" and emissions free. In fact, EVs are coal-powered cars, the dirtiest exhaust of them all. Coal burning plants do not have the low emissions rate that cars do. The reason electricity is cheaper is because coal is cheaper and transporting electricity costs less than transporting fuel. They don't do strip mining for oil. They do for coal. Using coal to ultimately power EVs is far less thermal conversion efficiency - meaning higher CO2 emissions.

That they are actually coal powered cars and adding that the energy conversion from coal to electricity to loses in transmission, lost energy in transformers, lost energy in chargers etc makes EVs the environmentally dirtiest cars of all. It would be FAR cleaner to just have those cars be coal burning steam powered cars to eliminate all the lost energy in the multi stages of energy conversion from coal to electricity.

Until electrical production is green, EVs are the highest co2 and polluting cars of all.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now coal is the only method of generating electricity? Please correct your statement.
 
Media_Truth said:
Good point. My daughter has the "apartment" problem.


See my posts on Tax Credits - huge savings.


Good point too. Most states collect at the time of licensing, with an additional charge. I had to pay a $50 surcharge to the state of CO.


Two points here. I believe, once we start depleting the Dakota fossil fuel reserve, which will probably be sooner than later, the way the US burns gasoline; you can expect rapidly increasing fuel prices. Coupling in the solar charging means near ZERO electric and gasoline costs. Most people are afraid of the up-front costs of solar PV systems. They don't do the actual calculations, and realize the savings involved.
Click to expand...

Most electricity is still fossil fuel based, though natural gas is rapidly replacing coal - somewhat contradicting my prior message.

A fella I know, extremely intelligent, said it right in my opinion:

The 1800s was the era of coal.
The 1900s was the era of oil.
The 2000s will become the era of natural gas.
Renewable and green energy will come in the 2100s.

That makes sense to me. EVs are premature as environmental and cost factor.s. Granting, the intentions of buyers towards green is good, but they aren't green now, they are "dirty" when all involved in making the electricity now and how it is transmitted is calculated.
 
Media_Truth said:
Oh, so now coal is the only method of generating electricity? Please correct your statement.
Click to expand...

I posted about now, not about a pretend future.

Only 18% of electricity in the USA is from renewable generation. That means 82% is not.
Renewable Energy Surges to 18% of U.S. Power Mix | Fortune

I HATE nuclear power and it certainly is NOT renewable, is THE most dangerous and vastly more expensive than coal or natural gas.

63% of electricity comes from fossil fuels in the USA. That means 63% of the power of EVs comes from fossil fuels.
precentage of electricty from fossil fuels in usa - Google Search

Most of the balance is from nuclear power.
 
joko104 said:
Most electricity is still fossil fuel based, though natural gas is rapidly replacing coal - somewhat contradicting my prior message.

A fella I know, extremely intelligent, said it right in my opinion:

The 1800s was the era of coal.
The 1900s was the era of oil.
The 2000s will become the era of natural gas.
Renewable and green energy will come in the 2100s.

That makes sense to me. EVs are premature as environmental and cost factor.s. Granting, the intentions of buyers towards green is good, but they aren't green now, they are "dirty" when all involved in making the electricity now and how it is transmitted is calculated.
Click to expand...

Up until your last paragraph, you were being reasonable. From strictly a pollution-standpoint (CO2 omitted), you are DEAD WRONG. Where are the largest pollution problems? - cities (See American Lung Association website). Electric vehicles do not pollute within the cities. Natural gas is much less polluting, and yes, that is the preferred fossil fuel of today. Take a state like Texas for example. If you are consuming electricity there, you are either getting it from Wind or Natural Gas.

Why do you think so many states are offering tax credits for EVs? Politicians are responsible for adherence to EPA standards. These standards are exceeded in cities throughout the US.
 
The nuclear power plant here is closed due to a crack in the containment chamber. Estimates to repair nearly $2 billion, so they closed it. They raised people's electric bills by 25% and then 50% to pre-pay for a new nuke, but after collecting a couple billion they cancelled the plan as more and more billions were added to the price tag and as the cost of the radioactive fuel keeps going up and up - and bribed the Florida legislature to let them just keep the couple billion they collected ultimately for nothing at all.

Instead, they are adding a massive natural gas electrical generating system to pipe in the gas to the 4 coal burning generating units. Natural gas is the immediate future, not solar or wind. If either of those were viable they would have built it, but it's not. EVs running on carbon-free sourced electricity is decades away. Driving an EV now is driving a co2 and emissions dirty car for its source of fuel and the energy lost in all the steps to get it to their car charger. and into their car.

2nd law of thermodynamics. With each conversion of energy there is energy lost. EVs now are neither clean environmentally nor energy efficient. That is a bill of goods being sold. Maybe in a few decades that won't be the case, but it is now.

Sorry EV owners. You aren't saving the planet from fossil fuels and co2. You're making it worse.
 
Solar power only is viable now at low level, point of usage like for street lights. Mega solar power plants are not even close to economically viable and carry their own environmental issues.
 
Media_Truth said:
Up until your last paragraph, you were being reasonable. From strictly a pollution-standpoint (CO2 omitted), you are DEAD WRONG. Where are the largest pollution problems? - cities (See American Lung Association website). Electric vehicles do not pollute within the cities. Natural gas is much less polluting, and yes, that is the preferred fossil fuel of today. Take a state like Texas for example. If you are consuming electricity there, you are either getting it from Wind or Natural Gas.

Why do you think so many states are offering tax credits for EVs? Politicians are responsible for adherence to EPA standards. These standards are exceeded in cities throughout the US.
Click to expand...

You do make a valid point about cities, particularly such as LA due to it's terrible location for wind not clearing out the air. Of course, the issue everyone talks about is climate change and EVs in the USA are counter productive to that. So EVs do make for cleaner air in LA, but in Florida that is not an issue - so only the co2 factor matters. Send up co2 everywhere in the USA but have cleaner air in some cities? That is not how the environmental impact pros and cons about EVs is discussed. They are presented as purely green. That is what I am stating, not a collection of absolutes.

Personally, I believe gas/diesel - electric hybrids make the most sense most places.

It is anyone guess why there are tax credits for EVs. The logic likely is recognizing otherwise they are not economically competitive, in a belief this prompts technological development, and a false believe that EVs are emissions free in relation to co2 - which they are not.

The government will ultimately essentially dictate EVs just like is happening in Europe so EVs are the future (good, bad or otherwise) - but that quite a ways off.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
14 HOURS is for Level 1 charging. Level 2 and Level 3 charging cuts charge time significantly.
It's not for everyone but it meets a market for enough people.
Besides, hybrid trucks are about to debut now that hybrid minivans have proven popular.
Click to expand...
I'm not against EVs per se. But range and charging availability are still big concerns for me. I have seen more charging stations around; google maps app even shows them now. But, even so, we're years away from EVs making a significant dent in fossil fuel vehicles.
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]New report suggests broad adoption of electric vehicles may actually increase air pollution[/h][FONT=&quot]New report suggests EV’s are out of reach for the average American, and broad adoption will actually cause an increase in traditional air pollution It asks whether the internal combustion engine is on its way out. It soon will be, according to advocates for “zero-emissions vehicle” (ZEV) technologies, especially battery-powered electric vehicles. They claim that…
[/FONT]
May 14, 2018 in Climate News.
 
Chomsky said:
I'm not really a fan of G.M. I'm thinking maybe a Toy, or Honda.
Click to expand...

I test-drove the Clarity. Nice plug-in hybrid which qualifies for the tax credit. It's not a SUV, but I'm thinking like GM, Honda will come out with another offering. Most manufacturers are getting away from Sedans and focusing on Hatchbacks and SUVs.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
You do make a valid point about cities, particularly such as LA due to it's terrible location for wind not clearing out the air. Of course, the issue everyone talks about is climate change and EVs in the USA are counter productive to that. So EVs do make for cleaner air in LA, but in Florida that is not an issue - so only the co2 factor matters. Send up co2 everywhere in the USA but have cleaner air in some cities? That is not how the environmental impact pros and cons about EVs is discussed. They are presented as purely green. That is what I am stating, not a collection of absolutes.

Personally, I believe gas/diesel - electric hybrids make the most sense most places.

It is anyone guess why there are tax credits for EVs. The logic likely is recognizing otherwise they are not economically competitive, in a belief this prompts technological development, and a false believe that EVs are emissions free in relation to co2 - which they are not.

The government will ultimately essentially dictate EVs just like is happening in Europe so EVs are the future (good, bad or otherwise) - but that quite a ways off.
Click to expand...

Did you even read my first post? Did you read the title of the thread? These electric vehicles can be powered 95-100% off solar photovoltaics. You're bias is so ingrained, that you clearly cannot accept a reality such as that.
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/05/14/new-report-suggests-broad-adoption-of-electric-vehicles-may-actually-increase-air-pollition/"]
short-circuit-ev-report.jpg
[/URL][/FONT]
[h=1]New report suggests broad adoption of electric vehicles may actually increase air pollution[/h][FONT="][FONT=inherit]New report suggests EV’s are out of reach for the average American, and broad adoption will actually cause an increase in traditional air pollution It asks whether the internal combustion engine is on its way out. It soon will be, according to advocates for “zero-emissions vehicle” (ZEV) technologies, especially battery-powered electric vehicles. They claim that…[/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/05/14/new-report-suggests-broad-adoption-of-electric-vehicles-may-actually-increase-air-pollition/"]May 14, 2018[/URL] in Climate News.
Click to expand...


Did you even read my first post? Did you read the title of the thread? These electric vehicles can be powered 95-100% off solar photovoltaics. You're bias is so ingrained, that you clearly cannot accept a reality such as that.
 
Media_Truth said:
Did you even read my first post? Did you read the title of the thread? These electric vehicles can be powered 95-100% off solar photovoltaics. You're bias is so ingrained, that you clearly cannot accept a reality such as that.
Click to expand...
How large a solar photovoltaic array does it take to charge these vehicles in reasonable periods of time, e.g. an hour or less?
 
Bullseye said:
How large a solar photovoltaic array does it take to charge these vehicles in reasonable periods of time, e.g. an hour or less?
Click to expand...

Depends on the sun intensity. Depends on the vehicle. Depends on how far you want to travel. If you want to be naysayer, you can make any excuse to say it's non-viable. It won't 100% charge in an hour or less, so you won't be able to drive 320 miles on one hour's charge. Capiche?

Now the logistics for those who are more rational-minded. The solar inverter from Solar-Edge comes in 2 sizes - 3800 Watt and 7600 Watt. For a vehicle this size, the 7600 Watt (about 25-30 solar panels) would do the trick. For illustration, let's assume we have 10 hours of bright sun - that's 76600 KiloWatt-Hours or 76 KWH. The small battery system Rivian (320 miles) has a 105 KWH battery pack. So 76 KWH would power the truck for over 200 miles. If only 5 hours of sunlight, that's still a 100-mile range on a large, powerful vehicle. Most EV's don't require near this much charging. So as the astute observer can see, these Photovoltaic systems can handle 95-100% of the vehicular powering for most households.
 
I’ll probably go hybrid before I go full electric. I like the peace of mind of having that tank of gas just in case. But kudos to you and others who are ahead of the curve.
 
Media_Truth said:
When people think of solar energy, they don't think of massive power. The Rivian is a full-sized electric pickup truck (available 2020), more powerful than the Toyota Tacoma.

View attachment 67253244

Here's a Motor Trend comparison to the Toyota Tacoma. Consider:

Access Denied

Helping make those numbers possible is a standard air suspension that gives the R1T 7.9 inches to 14.2 inches of ground clearance, significantly greater than the Tacoma's 9.4 inches.
...
Rivian claims the aluminum and steel R1T will hit 60 mph in just 3.0 seconds with the medium-sized battery.
...
Rivian also claims an 11,000-pound tow rating, though max towing will slow you down and cut your range in half. A four-door, four-wheel-drive Tacoma's tow rating tops out at 6,400 pounds.

Now the solar - SolarEdge has manufactured an inverter that will take power from solar panels and charge a vehicle with a 220-volt charge. The larger system is 7600 Watts. This will fully charge the Rivian in less than 14 hours. The Rivian (small-sized battery), fully-charged, has a 230-mile range.

SolarEdge | A World Leader in Smart Energy | A World Leader in Smart Energy

If designed properly, these Solar Edge systems can meet the total driving needs of most American households, without even being grid-tied. Similar to an off-grid home, the car batteries become the power storage for the solar energy. If one only achieves a 50 percent charge on some days, that still covers 115 miles for the Rivian pickup, and much more for Teslas, Chevy Bolts, and other EVs. And if it's rainy for 2 days - no big deal. Just plug it into a household outlet. You're not stranded.
Click to expand...

And my gasoline operated pickup will do twice the mileage on a tank of gas and I can refuel/recharge in about 5 minutes and do it all again.
 
Media_Truth said:
Depends on the sun intensity. Depends on the vehicle. Depends on how far you want to travel. If you want to be naysayer, you can make any excuse to say it's non-viable. It won't 100% charge in an hour or less, so you won't be able to drive 320 miles on one hour's charge. Capiche?

Now the logistics for those who are more rational-minded. The solar inverter from Solar-Edge comes in 2 sizes - 3800 Watt and 7600 Watt. For a vehicle this size, the 7600 Watt (about 25-30 solar panels) would do the trick. For illustration, let's assume we have 10 hours of bright sun - that's 76600 KiloWatt-Hours or 76 KWH. The small battery system Rivian (320 miles) has a 105 KWH battery pack. So 76 KWH would power the truck for over 200 miles. If only 5 hours of sunlight, that's still a 100-mile range on a large, powerful vehicle. Most EV's don't require near this much charging. So as the astute observer can see, these Photovoltaic systems can handle 95-100% of the vehicular powering for most households.
Click to expand...

I regularly make a drive of about 320 miles in about 4 1/2 hours. How's that going to work out with solar and where do I put the 25-30 solar panels.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
I’ll probably go hybrid before I go full electric. I like the peace of mind of having that tank of gas just in case. But kudos to you and others who are ahead of the curve.
Click to expand...

The plug-in hybrids are nice in that regard. The Volt (RIP after 2019) is a full electric-drive vehicle, and qualifies for the Electric tax credits, but it still has a gas tank. When electric charge is depleted, the gas automatically starts running a small gas engine, which powers a generator, which in turn powers the electric drive. This "Plug-in hybrid" is different than other hybrids.
 
Integrityrespec said:
I regularly make a drive of about 320 miles in about 4 1/2 hours. How's that going to work out with solar and where do I put the 25-30 solar panels.
Click to expand...

Sounds boring :)

Don't be surprised if an EV can actually cover this for you in a year or two. Tesla's 75KWH battery system can already get 310 miles. And with Graphene batteries on the horizon, who knows!

I'm putting my solar panels on my garage roof, which faces South.
 
Integrityrespec said:
I regularly make a drive of about 320 miles in about 4 1/2 hours. How's that going to work out with solar and where do I put the 25-30 solar panels.
Click to expand...

The original article on the Rivian Truck boasts a 400+ mile option. Also, if you have a 400 Amp/400 Volt charging system, it can recharge in 50 minutes. Of course, this isn't solar recharging. But we'll probably see these kind of high power charging stations on the road soon.

That's not a huge problem, though. Rivian's smallest lithium-ion battery is rated at 105 kW-hr, 5 kW-hr more than Tesla's largest battery. There's also a medium-sized battery good for 135 kW-hr and a "MegaPack" that holds 180 kW-hr. These batteries provide "230-plus", "300-plus", and "400-plus" miles of range, respectively. Regardless of capacity, each battery pack is made up of modules that can be replaced individually and won't strand the vehicle if one goes down. Each module holds up to 15 kW-hr and contains 864 cylindrical 21700-type cells. The small battery uses seven modules, the midsized one has nine, and there are 12 in the MegaPack. All have been fully tested to work between -40 and 122 degrees Fahrenheit.

Rivian hasn't announced all charging times yet but says the R1T can currently handle up to 160-kW charging (400 amps at 400 volts) through its SAE CCS-type plug in the driver-side front fascia. The MegaPack will take an 80 percent charge in 50 minutes at such a charger and add 200 miles of range in 30 minutes.
 
Chomsky said:
Wow! I'm blown away! And amazed. Hey, it's not my thing, but you've got my respect if it's yours.
Click to expand...

Nothing to respect. I've always had help getting my next used vehicle, and I've always had help keeping 'em running. I'm actually a massive idiot when it comes to anything automotive.

I expect a vehicle with close to 200k miles to last me a couple years. There's only been a few occasions where this was not the case, twice because I did not so much as check my oil, and another time when the oil pump gave out a few months after buying a car off the local mechanic. Considering that it was their grand-daughters car, no real way to predict the fuel pump going out [as far as I know], the cheap price of the vehicle, and the fact that they didn't charge me the next couple times I payed them a visit, I've got no reason to complain.
 
Media_Truth said:
Did you even read my first post? Did you read the title of the thread? These electric vehicles can be powered 95-100% off solar photovoltaics. You're bias is so ingrained, that you clearly cannot accept a reality such as that.
Click to expand...

I read it and ignored it because it's bogus pipe dream nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom