Tesla New Model Unveil...

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Lol you are such a dildo. Not even a good dildo, more like the bad ones found in a puddle behind hobo camp.

www.nytimes.com

How Green Is That Electric Car? And When It Hits 100 M.P.H.? (Published 2020)

The Tesla Model S and the Porsche Taycan give environmentally conscious speedsters an outlet for their desires.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com



Take it up with the Times. Quit trying so hard to smash your tonsils on my tip. You're such a cliche old white guy that will do whatever mental gymnastics necessary to avoid being told something.
Click to expand...
There is the reference material that states your claim. Thanks for that. And yesseriee it does in fact say in that article what you claim.

The source you are hanging onto is "One estimate on Tesla’s web forums claims that at full throttle the car..."

One estimate. From a web forum. I mean, you can find anything on the internet to back up any claim if that's all you need. Flat earth, Trump won, Democrats are baby eaters. Welcome to Q.

Yeah, what you are doing is called cherry picking. It is when somebody forms an opinion and goes out looking for something to back up his claim.
 
xtsho

xtsho

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Here is a guy who covers things green, renewables, energy storage etc. Some great topics are covered for those interested in green new grid technology and future options.

Just Have a Think - YouTube
World's most powerful tidal turbine : Launched April 2021
Click to expand...



Federal energy regulators gave Oregon State University the go-ahead Monday for a groundbreaking wave energy testing facility off the coast of the state.

The PacWave South project is designed to facilitate and speed up the development of wave energy technology, which harnesses the motion of the ocean to generate electricity. Oregon is considered to have a high potential for wave energy generation – much higher by coastal area than Washington or California. The Oregon Department of Energy says near-shore wave energy project alone have the potential to power 28 million homes annually.


www.opb.org

Oregon wave energy project gets federal go-ahead

Oregon State Univeristy plans to build a wave energy testing facility off Oregon's central coast. The project aims to speed up the development of new renewable energy technology.
www.opb.org
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
CatHedral said:
When I looked it up, it was avg 3 miles per kWh.

I consume less than ten kWh per day in my house.

Excepting 110 degree plus days. I live in the desert.
Click to expand...
Where did you get your numbers? I see the 3 gets 100 miles per 26kwh (it varies) combined, that’s .26 kWh per mile. As much as I don’t give a flying fuck about Tesla if I was debating their faults I would use citation. The point is there are facts and feels and there are no valid facts OR scenarios given to support his proclamations just feels. It’s almost reminiscent of a ttystick thread :eyesmoke:
 
CatHedral

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
Where did you get your numbers? I see the 3 gets 100 miles per 26kwh (it varies) combined, that’s .26 kWh per mile. As much as I don’t give a flying fuck about Tesla if I was debating their faults I would use citation. The point is there are facts and feels and there are no valid facts OR scenarios given to support his proclamations just feels. It’s almost reminiscent of a ttystick thread :eyesmoke:
Click to expand...
forums.tesla.com

Model 3 real world kWh/mile

Hello all Potential model 3 owner here soon (doing all my prospective research) and I’m sure this question gets annoying...
forums.tesla.com forums.tesla.com
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I think you and @mooray are confusing power consumption, which will obviously increase with hard acceleration, and Energy consumption which has little to do with acceleration.

Tesla model 3 consume 0.19 kWH of energy per mile. Power consumption (kW) will go up during the 4 or 5 so seconds it takes to do 30 miles but the overall energy consumed (kWH) will be about the same, maybe a little higher but not 6 times higher as you guys seem to be arguing. Hit me with a citation that says otherwise.
Click to expand...
Jesus, lol, you're a riot. Like I said, "as a house in a day", this means a certain amount of power(or energy lol) consumption over a period of time. The word "day" was your clue that we'd be talking about watt hours, or of course kilowatt hours when the watts exceed 1000. Yeah Yeah, I know you think moving a 2.5 ton car from 0-60 in less than two seconds uses five watts, but that's because you're a bit of a rere.

I hit you with a citation and yeah sure, I knew we'd see a typical fogtard floor routine.

http://imgur.com/YRMIxop

 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
xtsho said:
Federal energy regulators gave Oregon State University the go-ahead Monday for a groundbreaking wave energy testing facility off the coast of the state.

The PacWave South project is designed to facilitate and speed up the development of wave energy technology, which harnesses the motion of the ocean to generate electricity. Oregon is considered to have a high potential for wave energy generation – much higher by coastal area than Washington or California. The Oregon Department of Energy says near-shore wave energy project alone have the potential to power 28 million homes annually.


www.opb.org

Oregon wave energy project gets federal go-ahead

Oregon State Univeristy plans to build a wave energy testing facility off Oregon's central coast. The project aims to speed up the development of new renewable energy technology.
www.opb.org
Click to expand...
Just watched a “Mega marine machines” about the turbines being tested in the bay of fundy. The tides are amazing ;).
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Lol you are such a dildo. Not even a good dildo, more like the bad ones found in a puddle behind hobo camp.

www.nytimes.com

How Green Is That Electric Car? And When It Hits 100 M.P.H.? (Published 2020)

The Tesla Model S and the Porsche Taycan give environmentally conscious speedsters an outlet for their desires.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com



Take it up with the Times. Quit trying so hard to smash your tonsils on my tip. You're such a cliche old white guy that will do whatever mental gymnastics necessary to avoid being told something.
Click to expand...
Hey, did I say thanks for the article? In case I didn't, let me say so now.

Did you know that according to the Times, the current EV fleet is already having an effect on fossil fuel production? Did you know The Union of Concerned Scientists have rated EVs in the very highest categories of efficiency compared to gas buring cars? What's this about Tesla being dirty? The article you cited said they were not.

The latest report from the Union of Concerned Scientists, in a February article by David Reichmuth, its senior vehicles engineer, is much more optimistic than the one eight years ago. After analyzing all emissions — including those from fossil fuel production, along with conventional vehicle tailpipe emissions and power plant emissions — the group found that electric vehicles were responsible for about 10 percent less overall emissions in 2018 than they were just two years earlier. Emissions generated during vehicle and battery production or in the mining of lithium for E.V. batteries were not part of the calculation.

In this study, the average electric vehicle in the United States was found to be responsible for emission levels equivalent to those generated by a gasoline vehicle that gets 88 miles per gallon. In areas where a lot of coal is still burned to make electricity, the electric vehicle m.p.g. equivalency number can fall to as low as 49 miles to a gallon, but those areas are few and less densely populated than regions with clean power.

So if you want to disagree, take it to the Times.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Jesus, lol, you're a riot. Like I said, "as a house in a day", this means a certain amount of power(or energy lol) consumption over a period of time. The word "day" was your clue that we'd be talking about watt hours, or of course kilowatt hours when the watts exceed 1000. Yeah Yeah, I know you think moving a 2.5 ton car from 0-60 in less than two seconds uses five watts, but that's because you're a bit of a rere.

I hit you with a citation and yeah sure, I knew we'd see a typical fogtard floor routine.

http://imgur.com/YRMIxop

Click to expand...
One article cited one post on one forum. Sorry but that's a fail. I deleted my post because there simply isn't good information to back either of our claims.

On the other hand, nobody is going to drive a Tesla that way (full throttle for 30 miles) except for fun. So, it's kind of a ridiculous hill for you to die on.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Hey, did I say thanks for the article? In case I didn't, let me say so now.

Did you know that according to the Times, the current EV fleet is already having an effect on fossil fuel production? Did you know The Union of Concerned Scientists have rated EVs in the very highest categories of efficiency compared to gas buring cars? What's this about Tesla being dirty? The article you cited said they were not.

The latest report from the Union of Concerned Scientists, in a February article by David Reichmuth, its senior vehicles engineer, is much more optimistic than the one eight years ago. After analyzing all emissions — including those from fossil fuel production, along with conventional vehicle tailpipe emissions and power plant emissions — the group found that electric vehicles were responsible for about 10 percent less overall emissions in 2018 than they were just two years earlier. Emissions generated during vehicle and battery production or in the mining of lithium for E.V. batteries were not part of the calculation.

In this study, the average electric vehicle in the United States was found to be responsible for emission levels equivalent to those generated by a gasoline vehicle that gets 88 miles per gallon. In areas where a lot of coal is still burned to make electricity, the electric vehicle m.p.g. equivalency number can fall to as low as 49 miles to a gallon, but those areas are few and less densely populated than regions with clean power.

So if you want to disagree, take it to the Times.
Click to expand...
Moving the goalpost, sure I knew that would happen too, but I don't care. At least when I was wrong about the keys, I fully owned it.

They're obviously better than an equivalent class gas car in terms of gas/oil usage.

But seriously if you refuse to see the issues with manufacturing 5000 pounds of batteries and tires and plastics, then I'm just not going to get into it with you. I'll concede upfront, teslas are not at all dirty and are made from smiles and blueberry bagels.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
xtsho said:
Federal energy regulators gave Oregon State University the go-ahead Monday for a groundbreaking wave energy testing facility off the coast of the state.

The PacWave South project is designed to facilitate and speed up the development of wave energy technology, which harnesses the motion of the ocean to generate electricity. Oregon is considered to have a high potential for wave energy generation – much higher by coastal area than Washington or California. The Oregon Department of Energy says near-shore wave energy project alone have the potential to power 28 million homes annually.


www.opb.org

Oregon wave energy project gets federal go-ahead

Oregon State Univeristy plans to build a wave energy testing facility off Oregon's central coast. The project aims to speed up the development of new renewable energy technology.
www.opb.org
Click to expand...
One thing that Oregon has plenty of is waves.

Growing up as a diver in California, I thought we had it rough but realized how good I had it when I moved to Oregon. We go weeks on end with double digit sized waves, some storms waves top 25 feet. Waves like that in most places would cause a disaster. We just think of them as scenic.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Moving the goalpost, sure I knew that would happen too, but I don't care. At least when I was wrong about the keys, I fully owned it.

They're obviously better than an equivalent class gas car in terms of gas/oil usage.

But seriously if you refuse to see the issues with manufacturing 5000 pounds of batteries and tires and plastics, then I'm just not going to get into it with you. I'll concede upfront, teslas are not at all dirty and are made from smiles and blueberry bagels.
Click to expand...
lulz

You cherry picked one frickin sentence from that article that hinged on one post in one forum and now you are moving on to talk about batteries. Simply put, you are intellectually dishonest.

The article you cited is mainly about the promise of EV as a way to cut emissions. If you want to argue about that, take it up, as you say, with The Times.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
lulz

You cherry picked one frickin sentence from that article that hinged on one post in one forum and now you are moving on to talk about batteries. Simply put, you are intellectually dishonest.

The article you cited is mainly about the promise of EV as a way to cut emissions. If you want to argue about that, take it up, as you say, with The Times.
Click to expand...
Dude...what is wrong with you? Seriously, are you drunk? I supported something you specifically asked for and I mentioned the material needed to manufacture a tesla because you moved the goalpost onto me thinking they're "dirty". That's not intellectually dishonest, that's just called a "reply".

And I just acknowledged that they use less gas in their use. However, there is more going on than just that. What's funny is how you tried to call me out for cherry picking, when you specifically selected "battery" out of the three things I listed. It's like your memory is so short that you somehow missed the hypocrisy within the same sentence.

You're so incredibly bad at communicating.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
Just watched a “Mega marine machines” about the turbines being tested in the bay of fundy. The tides are amazing ;).
Click to expand...
There is a lot of potential in wave and tidal power on the coasts at least, solar ain't much use in Canada, wind works better up here. I see the oil companies are big on geothermal as a way of leveraging their expertise, tech and capital, I would expect things to happen in that area because of the players and infrastructure involved.
 
xtsho

xtsho

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
One thing that Oregon has plenty of is waves.

Growing up as a diver in California, I thought we had it rough but realized how good I had it when I moved to Oregon. We go weeks on end with double digit sized waves, some storms waves top 25 feet. Waves like that in most places would cause a disaster. We just think of them as scenic.
Click to expand...
They are scenic. I've been mesmerized by them my entire life. It only takes a little more than an hour to get to the coast from Portland. But the ocean needs to be respected. I used to do a lot of Jetty fishing. Never turn your back.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top