superswiss

So like the rest of us. We enjoy our ICE and going electric comes with trade offs and compromises that we are not willing to make. Isn't that what it boils down to and is exactly what Harry is getting on about in his video? Mass adoption is a lot harder than early adoption and being an early adopter rarely pays off in the long run. Been there too many times.

hlothery

Legit concerns, which I share. I bought my 450+ as my DD. I'm retired, play golf five days a week, and it's a 23 mile trip one way to the course. It's been nice to drive the EQS and spend $35 a month on electricity, rather than the gas my M550 used. We have an ICE for traveling, if we don't want to brave the charging grid. But, as it improves, we'll probably travel more in the EQS. I could care less about depreciation, have never bought a car as any kind of investment. Insurance costs are what they are....no big deal either. I love this car, and I love the fact that for the last two years I have contributed nothing to air pollution as I drive to play golf. (I might occasionally miss that twin turbo V8 in sport mode, tho?) YMMV.

superswiss

So you have solar and only charge when the sun shines strong enough?

teksurv

I'm in the lease an EV camp. Especially given how new the tech is for non-Tesla (and even then...). As for insurance, yes mine nearly doubled. Two middle aged people with no points living in an expensive state. As superswiss pointed out, even a minor accident leads to often a total loss of these expensive cars due to uncertainty around the battery mainly. The gas savings (this is my commuter) definitely makes up for this, but my primary motivation for driving an EV is the way it drives.

hlothery

Ha ha. OK, I get it....but there are still those emisions the M550 spews which the 450+ does not, so relatively..... No one is totally clean in this scenario.......just trying to make a difference. You can rain on my parade if you want. But unless we start with baby steps, we're never going to make a difference. Are you arguing that ICE is better? In my mind, if every family that has two cars (which is most) had one EV for local and one ICE for whatever, a significant benefit would exist for the environment. NO? YMMV.

superswiss

No, not arguing ICE is better from an emissions standpoint. Overall the jury is still out, because lithium mining is a dirty business and generally deprives arid regions of even more water. My believe is that we are not getting ourselves out of this by replacing ICE vehicles with EVs and just keep driving the way we've always had. There's one obvious way to reduce emissions from cars that doesn't get mentioned enough, and that is to drive less. Cut your driving in half and you cut your emissions in half. For example I don't commute 100s of miles every week like many do. I haven't commuted in like 10 years and before that I commuted by trains mostly. There are many ways to skin this cat.

I largely think this is all just wishful thinking of the western world. After the western world has enriched itself largely due to stable energy from hydrocarbons, we now think we can tell the rest of the world that they should get off fossil fuel so we can clean up the planet. India for example is not having it. They've seen how the west has gotten rich, and they want stable energy as well, so coal plants it is. It's pretty ignorant to vilify hydrocarbons, because it's gotten us where we are today. Yes, for better or worse, but modern medicine and pretty much everything we take for granted in life today was made possible by hydrocarbons. Maybe one day we'll succeed with nuclear fusion, but until then solar panels aren't gonna do it.

hlothery

Yep....I get that, too. There is no way to get to my golf course without driving. Unless I use the bus (an ICE machine in San Antonio) there is no way to get anywhere without driving, waliking or bicycling, which I used to do, but at age 74, with highways getting more congested and sparse bike lanes..... I do walk the golf course five times a week, but it is several miles to the grocery store, etc, etc, ... I just think that EV's could make some difference for local commuting, one spoke in an improvment wheel. Maybe I'm wrong....my son certainly thinks so. He also believes in carbon capture for improving coal plants, and that Texas' grid needs more of them.. I hope it gets figured out. But, I love my 450+ for many reasons, no emissions (relative to my M550) among them. Always enjoy talking to you!

SW20S

Its not that I enjoy the ICE. The EV is better in every way and I would much rather have the EV than the V8. I just still enjoy the car, I'm not "done with it yet" if that makes sense. The EV powertrain is the whole reason I want an EV.

I'm still deciding if I am willing to deal with those tradeoffs, I'm undecided yet,

Oh in daily driving it would be amazing, its just when I take a trip in the car which I do probably 5 times a year. For instance I just went skiing in the Pocanos, I would have had to charge for 25 minutes on my way there, and it was late in the evening and I was tired and I was happy that I didn't have to charge. Going to WV where there are two charging options and it would take a 35-45 min stop assuming the equipment is working and there is no wait...

MBNUT1

If everyone had your level of conscientiousness about climate change we would be far better off. Thank you for setting an example.

stealth.pilot

Let’s also add that EVs are superior vehicles to ICE for most day to day use cases. Smoother, quieter and more conducive to a luxury driving experience. Plus home charging is a huge time saver.

Yes there are corner cases which favor ice like manual transmission mid engined sports cars for mountain runs, or Wagoneers for cross country trips, but those are not day to day use.

Crito

I can understand the animosity towards so-called "green energy" people -- I mean, what's the carbon footprint of the tanks and bombs were sending to Ukraine? -- but it really is liberating to not have to suck on Shell's teet once a week just to get from point A to point B. That's also why I'd never buy a hydrogen vehicle as I can't fill up one of those at home either.

MB37

For now, the challenge continues to be energy density and weight of "batteries." Perhaps we will continue to imagine a lightweight glowing cylinder with the power capacity of a nuclear reactor the size of a 2 liter bottle. By then, I think our four wheel vehicles will be similar to the Fred Flintstone's ride.

MB37

I think EV falls in the area of marginal carbon displacement. I didn't get an EV to reduce my carbon footprint. I did it so I don't have to go fill up gas every so often. And in the summer time, my insulated garage won't be heated by a hot ICE.

MB2timer

Inside Edition has reported that EV’s are exploding, as well as catching fire, at an alarming rate.
Ask Omar Awan. If he was still alive. He died in the EV because the automatic door handles locked him in, and the break resistant glass prevented rescuers from extracting him from the ensuing inferno.
Insurance companies are beginning to balk at covering homes with charging stations installed.
Adoption rate of EVs now are at the rate of 3%.
There are multiple and tremendous downsides to EV’s, not the least of which are historic acceptance. They have been around for almost 200 years. A lot of the objections to EV’s in the last 2 centuries have still not been satisfactorily addressed.

nath_h

I think people complaining about an EV not being the perfect climate solution are missing that this is a quickly evolving technology. A couple weeks back, I was at the grocery store and pulled in to an EV charging spot. Some guy started yelling at me saying my EV was ruining the planet and helping encourage child labor (presumably he meant mining in Africa). While his aggressive hyperbole was weird and a little scary, it is true that the supply chain does have problems both in terms of labor and carbon footprint. So do most things we in the west consume generally without a second thought for how it got to us. But, EV supply sourcing and construction can evolve to a more perfect form, while ICE cars cannot. They will pollute a few molecules at a time, forever. What if the supply chain for EV's were cleaned up, with ethical labor, battery powered mining equipment, and green powered electricity? Pipe dream yes, but hopefully a dream we will gradually move toward as market forces push the cost of green power to be less expensive than carbon power (already achieved in some cases). The labor part...geez, personally I'd be happy to pay more for ethically sourced products of any kind. But it has been a race to the bottom for decades now.

Crito

Ah, I see the problem, you think the "news" on TV is real. Just Google "ev fires vs ice risk" and you'll find good data from many reliable sources that shows ICE vehicles are ~5X more likely to catch fire just sitting in your garage and at least 20X more likely to catch fire in an accident. As for extrication post-accident... I had a friend bleed out in a Delorian because nobody could cut through the stainless steel doors in time so I'm definitely not buying a Cybertruck. Crazy how all that steel got melty and weak on 9-11 tho.

SW20S

Yeah, since when is Inside Edition considered news? Don't they report on how many drinks Taylor and Travis had at the party and stuff? Oh I remember, its news when it aligns with your opinion and not when it doesn't.

INSIDE! inside!

superswiss

I don't really wanna get into this again, but I think people should understand the science behind car fires to manage the risk associated with each one. The issue with EV vs ICE fire statistics is they don't compare age. There are no 20 year old EVs on the road. The vast majority of ICE that catch fire and you can see that if you drill into the data are old or modified. Fuel pumps etc. start to leak eventually, but we are talking 20+ years. ICE also don't self-ignite. A spark is needed to ignite the fuel. As I've said before, the issue with EV fires is not the likelihood, but the severity. An ICE fire can easily be put out, but an EV fire cannot be put out and may even reignite. The strategy for an EV fire is to let it burn. Not even getting into how much more toxic the fumes are from a battery fire. FWIW, I take an ICE catching fire in my garage over an EV any time. Because the sprinklers in my garage will likely put it out. An EV fire in my garage means the house is gonna burn down. Two very different risk scenarios.

SW20S

Its not something that concerns me on any level, personally.

superswiss

You are in real estate, right? Perhaps you might find this presentation interesting. Probably should be concerned.

SW20S

Not concerned

superswiss

What's the name of your company? Wanna make sure I don't buy any real estate from you guys if you are not concerned about fire safety.

hlothery

Definitely an interesting video, which describes the horrific results of Li batteries gone bad. I know that happens......but given the number of these devices we all own, I'm not sure it's as likely as seems to be depicted in the video. One is sitting on my lap now as I type. One is in my pocket, and one by my side. Many are in my garage in one form or another, one of course in my EQS. Technological risk exists with all forms of energy, no exceptions. Safeguards are well established for many (though we still have catastrophic events periodically), in transition for others. Other than abandoning technology, there is no way to isolate from it as safety for all these devices evolves. I'm willing to take some risk and participate in trying to find better ways to exist on the planet and thrive. I wish there were easier answers, but..... Glad folks like Dr. Christensen are working on it. BTW, I love my EQS!

superswiss

When it comes to battery fires, the crucial part is the amount of energy in the battery. That battery on your lap has somewhere between 2500 to 4000 mAh. At 3.7 Volt that's 14.8 Wh. EV batteries are 80 kWh and up. That's ~5000 times and up more energy. Your typical cell phone battery has even less energy in it. So a cell phone or laptop battery catching fire burns out very quickly and if lucky doesn't set anything else on fire around it. A firecracker can give you 2nd or perhaps even 3rd degree burns, but a grenade can rip off a couple of limps. Which do you prefer? They are both explosive, just a few magnitudes difference in energy potential.

Cell phones and laptops are also not typically out in the elements and exposed to shock, vibration and debris potentially piercing the battery. We don't even have to go to EVs. More and more people have e-bikes or e-scooters. Those batteries store more energy than your typical cell phone or laptop battery and have very lax safety regulations. Especially in China, and keep in mind most of the batteries come from China, these things go up in flames very regularly as some of the examples he showed during the presentation demonstrate. The number of EVs on the road are very small compared to the number of ICE at the moment, so the risk is somewhat contained, but entire parking structures have already gone up in flames due to EVs being parked there. One of the most recent one was at the Luton airport in the UK. These fires melt steel and concrete.

hlothery

Certainly not questioning the catastrophic nature of an EQS battery fire, should that happen. Just questioning the likelyhood of it happening unless the battery has been somehow damaged. Has that ever happened to an EQS that had not suffered prior damage? The other Tesla fires, seems I remember most of them suffering some kind of damage prior to the fires. Now, these cheap Chinese (and other) small EV bike/scooter/etc fires...yes, I would never buy one of them. Should damage occur to a mainstream EV....well now, that's a different story altogether, and extreme caution should be undertaken, including parking it away from structures until it can be rendered safe. I still love my EQS!.