Ford’s unveils all electric F-150..."The Lightning"

[mdlUK.1]

If they can get that total mileage up to 500 miles per full charge, I'm in.

It takes 10 minutes to fill a tank with gas. How long to charge a battery? 500 miles isn’t going to get you from east coast to west coast.

 

[HUBER]

It takes 10 minutes to fill a tank with gas. How long to charge a battery? 500 miles isn’t going to get you from east coast to west coast.

More worried about that occasional trip to Florida or the Carolinas, or Chicago. The technology is coming. And Ill wait until then. I can get over 21 mpg on the highway in my Ram 2500 diesel, and with a 31 gallon fuel tank, I can go well over 500 miles before the next fill up.

 

[BlueRaider22]

That will only happen if those technologies end up being the prevailing technology in the marketplace. At this point who knows. I have no problem with investors developing and trying to create markets for the technologies you mentioned. It's what investors do. They risk capital for what hopefully will be huge reward. Those technologies aren't the issue. The issue is forcing low cost power production out of the marketplace through government regulation. When that happens, our energy costs go up relative to China and India, for example. That creates additional incentive to produce goods in China and India. It has nothing to do with EVs, autonomous driving, artificial intelligence, etc. It has to do with forcing low cost energy production to shut down because the government thinks, or wants you to think, that by doing that they are solving some global problem when in reality they are not without the full participation of China, India, and other developing countries that burn large amounts of fossil fuel.

I'll give you an example of what I mean. If we make a huge move to renewable energy and continue to shut down fossil fuel generation, our energy costs will increase. Let's assume by 10% just for arguments sake. If we develop the worlds leading technology for automated driving electric vehicles, why would you assume they will be built here? If energy costs here are high, they could easily be built in China and shipped back here for sale. Just because we develop the technology and are the world leader doesn't mean those goods will be manufactured here. If our costs are not competitive, they will be manufactured somewhere else.

The US is already HUGE leaders in all the technologies mentioned above. The companies are already based here......and most of the first usage will be here. If there is already such a lead and usage on the way, why would anyone expect someone else to benefit from it as much as the US?

Also, renewable energies won't cut it alone. There's an enormous cost up front for renewable energy, but then the costs decrease substantially. If the US wants to go with cleaner sources of energy, it will certainly have to rely on nuclear. While the cost of energy may increase overall, it'll cause a decline in costs elsewhere.




But I always agree. Less gub'ment regulation is a good thing. I will always agree with that.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

The US is already HUGE leaders in all the technologies mentioned above. The companies are already based here......and most of the first usage will be here. If there is already such a lead and usage on the way, why would anyone expect someone else to benefit from it as much as the US?

Also, renewable energies won't cut it alone. There's an enormous cost up front for renewable energy, but then the costs decrease substantially. If the US wants to go with cleaner sources of energy, it will certainly have to rely on nuclear. While the cost of energy may increase overall, it'll cause a decline in costs elsewhere.




But I always agree. Less gub'ment regulation is a good thing. I will always agree with that.

Yes. The free market is the best approach to determining which technologies should be funded and which ones should die on the vine, not government. I am 100% with you there.

 

[BlueRaider22]

If they can get that total mileage up to 500 miles per full charge, I'm in.

Currently is 300.....but I'd be willing to bet that if you pull something of size it'll drop you down below 100. How would you like to stop every 80 miles while pulling a load to charge for 18 hrs?

 

[DSmith21]

Agreed. China will change with the times too......they're just behind the US and Europe in their timeline.

I think that you are being too optimistic about China. As of 2020, they are currently building over 150 new coal fired plants. These are 50-70 year investments so they obviously aren't planning on giving up on coal for many decades. They are also building coal fired plants for other countries in Asia and Africa. Roughly 350 coal fired plants are under construction world wide. This according to the Canadian Energy Center. The US only has 250 coal fired plants left in operation and this is dropping every year. China has over 1,000 coal plants and climbing quickly.

 

[trueblujr2]

I agree that China is the biggest problem, but that doesn't mean that other countries shouldn't do anything. You can clean up your own yard at the same time you are putting pressure on your neighbor to clean up theirs.

You're right about nearly all of this country's electricity being produced by coal and gas-fired plants. Gas burns much cleaner than coal, but it's still non-renewable. Nuclear is the way to go, but without the fed government getting off their ass to subsidize the plants they're too expensive operationally to run. Plus a lot of idiots have been scared of nuclear power since Chernobyl.

There's a difference between "cleaning up your own yard" and the doomsday we're all gonna die in 10 years so we Americans have to go all psycho Green New Deal and start shutting down fossil fuels before viable alternatives are fully in place.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

It would be more effective to cut our imports from China by 25 percent, and create a tariff system for Chinese products tied to real, verifiable reductions in THEIR carbon footprint than for every American to start driving an electric vehicle tomorrow.

But that will never happen because virtually all American politicians are, directly or indirectly, beholden to China.

As it is, we're damaging our economy to reach carbon emissions goals that don't even offset the projected INCREASES in China's emissions for the next decade at least. Yes, if the United States cuts emissions by 35 percent by 2030, and China's continue to rise as projected until that date, the net result will be the same level of CO2 emissions as we have today -- except China will be immensely stronger economically and we will be much weaker.

You know the cost of tariffs just eventually ends up getting paid by the consumer, right?

 

[MdWIldcat55]

You know the cost of tariffs just eventually ends up getting paid by the consumer, right?

Yes I do. That's my point. Consumers would pay much higher prices for Chinese goods -- one hopes sharply driving down the appetite for them and forcing China into a recession in which they cut back on pollution-generating production.

Paying higher prices for Chinese goods is a better, much more effective and more direct way to burden Americans if one wants to limit carbon emissions. It'd be far more effective, and cheaper in the long run, than subsidizing electric cars with taxpayer dollars or building windmill farms with taxpayer dollars while continuing to buy wantonly from China while they increase emissions so rapidly that any reduction in the U.S. is symbolic at best.

People who want to lower US emissions by any means while allowing China's emissions to rise at a steep trajectory are not serious about it -- it is simply a political, or worse, emotional, issue for them.

One final point: The Biden Administration is taking steps that will hamstring sectors of the US economy to meet his goal of "halving US emissions by 2030." Do your research using official government estimates that are readily available. If that happens, cutting US emissions in half won't compensate for the INCREASE in projected Chinese emissions by 2030. Yes, America will sacrifice to cut emissions in half, and overall emissions will still rise -- thanks to China alone.

 

[CatGotMyTongue]

Flying cars, gents. It’s coming

 

[Elbridge]

Ah yes, those evil leaders twirling their mustaches and laughing about pushing electric vehicles for the nefarious purpose of... taking away your choices! That's the dumbest thing I've heard yet today.

You and your boy Boston never respond with any facts and offer no debate other than to say something is dumb or stupid. What are you twelve? You and B were definitely products of public education. You must be one of those Americans I was referring to.

 

[Bill Derington]

Yes I do. That's my point. Consumers would pay much higher prices for Chinese goods -- one hopes sharply driving down the appetite for them and forcing China into a recession in which they cut back on pollution-generating production.

Paying higher prices for Chinese goods is a better, much more effective and more direct way to burden Americans if one wants to limit carbon emissions. It'd be far more effective, and cheaper in the long run, than subsidizing electric cars with taxpayer dollars or building windmill farms with taxpayer dollars while continuing to buy wantonly from China while they increase emissions so rapidly that any reduction in the U.S. is symbolic at best.

People who want to lower US emissions by any means while allowing China's emissions to rise at a steep trajectory are not serious about it -- it is simply a political, or worse, emotional, issue for them.

One final point: The Biden Administration is taking steps that will hamstring sectors of the US economy to meet his goal of "halving US emissions by 2030." Do your research using official government estimates that are readily available. If that happens, cutting US emissions in half won't compensate for the INCREASE in projected Chinese emissions by 2030. Yes, America will sacrifice to cut emissions in half, and overall emissions will still rise -- thanks to China alone.

You’re exactly right, and it doesn’t even take into account the damage to the manufacturing sector that will be brought on by Biden’s steps.

Take a steel mill or Aluminum plant. It takes a ton of electricity to run those, hundreds of Mega watts. If energy prices increase, which they will, they will be shuttered in the US.
If we continue on this path, there will be rolling brownouts in temp extremes.

 

[Johns721]

Ford Assembly Plant is closing here in Louisville for like 6 weeks due to the shortage of semi-conductors. Sounds like poor planning and supply chain issues on Ford's part.

LAP is shutting down because they are diverting every available piece of silicon to the big trucks @ KTP. The market for trucks in general is red hot right now, but the profit is all in the SuperDuty trucks, so the chips go where the money is. GM is doing the same thing to keep Fort Wayne/Flint/Arlington running at full capacity making the Silverado variants.

 

[BlueRaider22]

I think that you are being too optimistic about China. As of 2020, they are currently building over 150 new coal fired plants. These are 50-70 year investments so they obviously aren't planning on giving up on coal for many decades. They are also building coal fired plants for other countries in Asia and Africa. Roughly 350 coal fired plants are under construction world wide. This according to the Canadian Energy Center. The US only has 250 coal fired plants left in operation and this is dropping every year. China has over 1,000 coal plants and climbing quickly.

They also build cities of buildings that sit vacant because they only intended to use it for 3-5 yrs....and they did. They whip up hospitals in a matter of wks to use for a few years only to leave them vacant. They are currently pumping massive amount of gub’ment capital into Nio, Tesla, Xpeng. The gub’ment also has said they want to outlaw ICE engines in the country by 2035. Also, even though they are building coal plants, they doubled their renewable energy production in 2020 alone according to Reuters.

 

[CatOfDaVille]

There's a difference between "cleaning up your own yard" and the doomsday we're all gonna die in 10 years so we Americans have to go all psycho Green New Deal and start shutting down fossil fuels before viable alternatives are fully in place.

Agree. We need to get there at some point, but we have to be smart and methodical about it.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

Yes I do. That's my point. Consumers would pay much higher prices for Chinese goods -- one hopes sharply driving down the appetite for them and forcing China into a recession in which they cut back on pollution-generating production.

Paying higher prices for Chinese goods is a better, much more effective and more direct way to burden Americans if one wants to limit carbon emissions. It'd be far more effective, and cheaper in the long run, than subsidizing electric cars with taxpayer dollars or building windmill farms with taxpayer dollars while continuing to buy wantonly from China while they increase emissions so rapidly that any reduction in the U.S. is symbolic at best.

People who want to lower US emissions by any means while allowing China's emissions to rise at a steep trajectory are not serious about it -- it is simply a political, or worse, emotional, issue for them.

One final point: The Biden Administration is taking steps that will hamstring sectors of the US economy to meet his goal of "halving US emissions by 2030." Do your research using official government estimates that are readily available. If that happens, cutting US emissions in half won't compensate for the INCREASE in projected Chinese emissions by 2030. Yes, America will sacrifice to cut emissions in half, and overall emissions will still rise -- thanks to China alone.

So your bright idea is to harm the low and middle class people, the ones most negatively effected by the pandemic, by forcing them to have to pay much more money for their stuff?

 

[MdWIldcat55]

So your bright idea is to harm the low and middle class people, the ones most negatively effected by the pandemic, by forcing them to have to pay much more money for their stuff?

Lol. Your bright idea is to damage the American economy so you can feel better about yourself while accomplishing absolutely nothing —the net amount of emissions continues to rise.

If you are serious about cutting CO2, then the result is going to be a worldwide recession and everyone is going to pay a price. Sounds like you are more interested in political posturing and useless gestures that have the net effect of strengthening the world’s biggest polluter.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

Lol. Your bright idea is to damage the American economy so you can feel better about yourself while accomplishing absolutely nothing —the net amount of emissions continues to rise.

If you are serious about cutting CO2, then the result is going to be a worldwide recession and everyone is going to pay a price. Sounds like you are more interested in political posturing and useless gestures that have the net effect of strengthening the world’s biggest polluter.

So something isn't 100% effective that means it's 0% effective? Net emissions would be drastically hire if countries like the USA weren't making a concerted effort to reduce emissions, that's accomplishing something. If the USA and all these other countries did nothing and just continued on with our old merry ways of polluting with no regard for human life, then we'd be seeing smogged hellscapes all over the country.

But I guess since one person isn't holding up their end of the deal we should just throw our hands up in the air and say *uck it, we quit.

In my neck of the woods, that is what we call a quitter and a loser.

 

[MdWIldcat55]

So something isn't 100% effective that means it's 0% effective? Net emissions would be drastically hire if countries like the USA weren't making a concerted effort to reduce emissions, that's accomplishing something. If the USA and all these other countries did nothing and just continued on with our old merry ways of polluting with no regard for human life, then we'd be seeing smogged hellscapes all over the country.

But I guess since one person isn't holding up their end of the deal we should just throw our hands up in the air and say *uck it, we quit.

In my neck of the woods, that is what we call a quitter and a loser.

Putting all the onus for change on the United States while buying stuff from the world’s biggest polluter without taking necessary steps to force them the even stop the exploding rise in their co2 emissions - thus assuring all our sacrifices are useless. In my neck of the woods we call that a fool.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

Putting all the onus for change on the United States while buying stuff from the world’s biggest polluter without taking necessary steps to force them the even stop the exploding rise in their co2 emissions - thus assuring all our sacrifices are useless. In my neck of the woods we call that a fool.

China has a plan to be a net-zero emissions country by 2060. The plan anticipates peaking by 2030, due to the growing Chinese economy, before beginning to decline after that.

Looks like the fool here is you for not doing your research.

China Says It Will Stop Releasing CO2 within 40 Years

The surprise announcement vaults the country ahead of U.S. climate ambitions and could encourage developing countries to follow suit

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[MdWIldcat55]

China has a plan to be a net-zero emissions country by 2060. The plan anticipates peaking by 2030, due to the growing Chinese economy, before beginning to decline after that.

China Says It Will Stop Releasing CO2 within 40 Years

The surprise announcement vaults the country ahead of U.S. climate ambitions and could encourage developing countries to follow suit

www.scientificamerican.com

Lol. So they are going to stay on their hockey stick upward trajectory for another decade, then, maybe, ‘voluntarily’ start to cut emissions? What behavior patterns of that regime make you believe that?

And what happened to the assertion that we only have ten years to halve global emissions to avoid calamity? For that entire critical period, China’s will skyrocket, even under the dubious plan you naively believe.

By the way, a couple posts back you accused my plan of hurting the poor. Who exactly is hurt by skyrocketing energy prices, inevitable inflation, higher taxes and other effects of an abrupt attack on fossil fuels? That’s right - poor Americans.

 

[DSmith21]

China has a plan to be a net-zero emissions country by 2060. The plan anticipates peaking by 2030, due to the growing Chinese economy, before beginning to decline after that.

Looks like the fool here is you for not doing your research.

China Says It Will Stop Releasing CO2 within 40 Years

The surprise announcement vaults the country ahead of U.S. climate ambitions and could encourage developing countries to follow suit

www.scientificamerican.com

So why is China building over 100 coal fired plants per year if they are going to be carbon neutral in a few decades. These plants they are building are 50-70 year investments. China also has the second most coal resources in the world behind the US. We are being played for suckers by the Chinese. They are not going to stop using coal in our lifetimes.

 

[KyCatFan]

Guess there’s no more room at KY Speedway.

Redirect Notice

I still don’t understand the rush on trucks. Is it just a stimulus check thing? A “they’re gonna ban gas trucks!!!” thing, or what? People are awful anxious to pay full msrp or more on some trucks.

Everyone here is buying Dodge. I guess they have chips, or are cheaper

I was just at the Jefferson Mall in Louisville yesterday and there are large areas of the parking lot fenced in and full of Ford SUV's. I'm assuming that has to do with the issue mentioned above.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

China has a plan to be a net-zero emissions country by 2060. The plan anticipates peaking by 2030, due to the growing Chinese economy, before beginning to decline after that.

Looks like the fool here is you for not doing your research.

China Says It Will Stop Releasing CO2 within 40 Years

The surprise announcement vaults the country ahead of U.S. climate ambitions and could encourage developing countries to follow suit

www.scientificamerican.com

Stopped at “China says”. Thanks.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

So why is China building over 100 coal fired plants per year if they are going to be carbon neutral in a few decades. These plants they are building are 50-70 year investments. China also has the second most coal resources in the world behind the US. We are being played for suckers by the Chinese. They are not going to stop using coal in our lifetimes.

Anyone who believes anything china says is just not someone capable of rational conversation imo.

With electric vehicles we're doing nothing to reduce dependency on fossil fuel. We're trading oil at the pump for oil at the power plant. Except now we get to add in the scarring of the lithium mines and massive taxpayer subsidies which made Elon musk mega rich (yes I know he was rich before but not like now).

Even better we traded domestic energy independence with coal for energy dependence on oil.

Also without domestic coal we can't produce domestic steel, which is another reason we import from china tons of our steel.

If we were attacked tomorrow by the china/iran axis, independently we could neither fuel or vehicles nor replace ones lost in battle. But at least a segment of the population gets to keep virtue signalling

 

[vhcat70]

Going to electric vehicles isn't about saving the environment. It's about taking away more of your choices and liberties. The average American idiot doesn't even know how 90% of electricity is generated in the US. God help us. We are being governed by idiots.

19% coal, 40% NG.

 

[vhcat70]

It takes 10 minutes to fill a tank with gas. How long to charge a battery? 500 miles isn’t going to get you from east coast to west coast.

I read that with 880V chargers - apparently some are working on those, up from the 440V Tesla superchargers - they can get 300 miles of range in under 20 minutes. Still not as short as filling with gas, but close to reasonable.

 

[vhcat70]

Flying cars, gents. It’s coming

Jump on a drone. Slim Pickens was just ahead of his time in Doc Strangelove.

 

[vhcat70]

Anyone who believes anything china says is just not someone capable of rational conversation imo.

With electric vehicles we're doing nothing to reduce dependency on fossil fuel. We're trading oil at the pump for oil at the power plant. Except now we get to add in the scarring of the lithium mines and massive taxpayer subsidies which made Elon musk mega rich (yes I know he was rich before but not like now).

Even better we traded domestic energy independence with coal for energy dependence on oil.

Also without domestic coal we can't produce domestic steel, which is another reason we import from china tons of our steel.

If we were attacked tomorrow by the china/iran axis, independently we could neither fuel or vehicles nor replace ones lost in battle. But at least a segment of the population gets to keep virtue signalling

Buy manganese futures.

 

[IdaCat]

WTF? You virtue signalers shouldn't be talking about trucks. They are among the biggest power consumption hogs on the highway. And what produces the overwhelming bulk of that power?

We've got less than 10 years before it's too late or something.

Let's see some intellectual honesty. Here's your ride right here boys:

 

[CatGotMyTongue]

WTF? You virtue signalers shouldn't be talking about trucks. They are among the biggest power consumption hogs on the highway. And what produces the overwhelming bulk of that power?

We've got less than 10 years before it's too late or something.

Let's see some intellectual honesty. Here's your ride right here boys:

I’m gonna drive this through the West End

 

[mdlUK.1]

I read that with 880V chargers - apparently some are working on those, up from the 440V Tesla superchargers - they can get 300 miles of range in under 20 minutes. Still not as short as filling with gas, but close to reasonable.

Yeah, that doesn’t sound too bad.

 

[Crums Bald Spot]

Saving the environment by mining the whole world for lithium

I'd really like to see the comparative analysis on the following by a nonpartisan/non-special interest study:

1. Are electric vehicles truly helping/hurting the environment when you factor in how the batteries are made and the toxic waste they create when disposed of?
2. When you count in charging and the fossil fuels used to make most of the electricity, is it truly a net positive for emissions and if so, what is the +/-?
3. The loss of tax revenue due to less gas being bought - how are we going to ensure the betas and women are picking up their part of the tab/closing the shortfall?

 

[birdforbogey]

More worried about that occasional trip to Florida or the Carolinas, or Chicago. The technology is coming. And Ill wait until then. I can get over 21 mpg on the highway in my Ram 2500 diesel, and with a 31 gallon fuel tank, I can go well over 500 miles before the next fill up.

Don’t you have to stop for beer?

 

[BigSexyCat]

Saving the environment by mining the whole world for lithium

Slave labor is also used to mine the lithium. People would be amazed how dirty clean energy actually is.

 

[BigSexyCat]

I think that you are being too optimistic about China. As of 2020, they are currently building over 150 new coal fired plants. These are 50-70 year investments so they obviously aren't planning on giving up on coal for many decades. They are also building coal fired plants for other countries in Asia and Africa. Roughly 350 coal fired plants are under construction world wide. This according to the Canadian Energy Center. The US only has 250 coal fired plants left in operation and this is dropping every year. China has over 1,000 coal plants and climbing quickly.

The Dems are getting paid by the Chicoms that's why they keep their pieholes shut when discussing anything related to China.

 

[jameslee32]

Ford Mustang Mach E

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

Ford Mustang Mach E

Gross

 

[420grover]

Ford Mustang Mach E

I'm a Chevy guy but that thing should not be named Mustang.

 

[Chuckinden]

Going to electric vehicles isn't about saving the environment. It's about taking away more of your choices and liberties. The average American idiot doesn't even know how 90% of electricity is generated in the US. God help us. We are being governed by idiots.

That's idiocy.