drdabbles

It's funny when you can't tell if a post is satire or serious but deranged.

Either way, Musk doesn't have the skills required to do anything involving stealing or effecting the outcome of an election. Dude can't even sway his own piss poor polls on Twitter.

Yeah, I think I disagree with the entire beginning of the paragraph. If we're talking North America, then sure Tesla is the leading brand but that lead is being eroded. If you think globally, they aren't though.

I also think the number of Tesla owners that are Tesla "fans" has dwindled rapidly. Most owners are still happy with their purchase according to consumer reporting. But more than ever before, Tesla owners are considering brands besides Tesla. This was something that Tesla relied on heavily for marketing, but the reality was that owners that wanted EVs had few choices. That's not the case anymore. And the once rabid fandom is significantly smaller because most owners are now normal people buying a car. It's not religion to them.

As far as Tesla fans being Elon fans? I think that's less true than ever as well. And he's certainly not winning his new allies over to EVs. I've got a family full of people that are politically like-minded that have no interest whatsoever to buy an EV, and they'll probably die before they do. His fandom didn't follow him into his ketamine fueled psychosis, he's just got more paid bots amplifying him now because he own's the bot farm and the bot platform.

So, the EV space has become a place where right-wing views have become more normalized.

I disagree with this sentiment the most. There have always been right-wing people in the EV space, for decades at this point. Many of them have owned Teslas and made no bones about their political leanings. But to claim there's more acceptance or more normalization of right wing politics as a whole in the EV consumer spaces without any data whatsoever is beyond suspect in my opinion.

For a while I had daily notes that had a dataview linking to other notes created on the same day as the daily note, then I had a weekly note that linked to all my daily notes created during that week number. The note itself was a place to centralize links to other notes, jot down what was going on, stuff like that.

In the end, it was creating more work than I wanted to do and I wasn't finding myself going back to review those daily or weekly notes. When I'm creating notes I never look at again, I know I'm wasting my time.

LFP in Marine applications is mostly a cost driven choice, because the cost per kWh is 10-20% lower for LFP compared to NCA and NMC. NCA and NMC batteries are absolutely available for marine applications, and they store around 33% more energy for the same volume as LFP which makes them a good choice in space constrained applications. But, as you pointed out most marine applications are converting from AGM which is so huge that any Lithium based battery is a win.

If fire safety was the determining factor, LTO would be the battery choice rather than LFP. But nobody's going to make that choice because LTO sucks compared to LFP.

Something to consider is that NMC and NCA cells can use less volatile electrolyte, with several solutions to that particular problem already existing in commercial applications. On top pf that, there are additives to electrode material that can physically separate them from their current collector, thus stopping all electrical flow completely. Panasonic is starting to produce such cells now.

LFP doesn't have a higher cycle life, it has an equal cycle life but with lower current capacity. So at the end of the cell's expected lifetime the LFP cell has stored and discharged vastly less Watt-hours than an NCA or NMC cell. This is a really critical component of the lifetime cost calculation, obviously.

LFP isn't a really good power source, it's an entirely acceptable power source. But in the application of a vehicle where weight is a key factor because road wear increases with the 3rd or 4th power of vehicle weight, any cell technology that requires a physically larger and heavier pack (LFP requires both dimensions be increased) isn't a clear win. LFP is a great technology for stationary storage, though, since the size and weight are much less of a concern.

One of the key things to remember is that any technology that improves one cell type is likely to improve all similar cell types. So as improvements in electrolyte and current collector safety improve with LFP, they also improve with NCA and NMC which makes the latter two more attractive.

Hard pass on them buying Rivian. I don't want my truck locked into their walled garden. Apple making BEVs makes very little sense at all, but I could see them getting into the infotainment and body controller business if they wanted to branch out in the hardware space.

As of right now, long haul Class 8 is really not very feasible for BEV. The range is low enough that you don't get a full driving shift out of it, and that's really how long haul vehicles move. I think once we reach that point, though, the 30 minutes per 8 driving hours break (in the US) might be a bit too low to achieve a full 10 or 11 hour driving time day. But the minimum rest time after 10 or 11 driving hours is 8-10 hours which is much more time than would be required to charge on even a 150kW DCFC.

I think we're getting closer to Class 8 being feasible, but it's probably 5 years off or so still. Good to get the infrastructure in place now rather than having it lagging behind when these trucks start showing up in higher numbers.

https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-service/summary-hours-service-regulations

I'm a bit surprised they're deploying 350kW chargers for Class 8 vehicles rather than MCS chargers. Though I'm guessing there's an attempt to strike a balance between easily available utilities services, driving segment length, driving shift length, and charger speed. But when MCS chargers start getting deployed, Class 8 vehicles become much more reasonable.

Cool. Yeah, that's how people behave. You should meet more of them, I think. Also, quite a bit of that piece is Fred's opinion, so maybe consider that.

I figured we were having a discussion. Calling it disinformation is hilarious though.

Like I said, it doesn't really impact me. So, you can feel how you want to feel. I don't believe anything Tesla says because I've owned one, and I know how they attempt to manipulate their news cycle. I also downloaded the raw data and ran the numbers myself. The Semi does not achieve 500 mile range with a full gross weight traveling at normal highway speeds. You can calculate the rate of SOC decline between data points where the average speed was > 50 MPH and it comes nowhere close.

Now, if on the other hand the title said DHL was happy with their Semi test bed then that wouldn't really be up for dispute. But the instant the title said it achieves 500 miles then I'm sorry but there's no data to support that claim that has ever been published. And I promise you, if such data did exist Tesla would be the first to brag about it incessantly.

I did indeed respond.