Jump to content

- - - - -

4 Wheel Camper Cybertruck plans

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#21 craig333


    Riley's Human

  • Members
  • 7,766 posts
  • LocationSacramento

Posted 05 April 2023 - 10:23 PM

Right now I can hop in my truck and go. Don't have to plan if I don' t want to. Not going to be the same for an EV. More power to the early adopters though. Someone has to get it started for it to get to the point someone like me would be interested.


Solar charging might even work for some of us. I could see spending my 14 day allowance somewhere waiting for my EV to charge. 

  • 1

Craig K6JGV_________________________ 2004 2500 CTD 4X4 FWC HAWK 1960 CJ5

#22 ckent323


    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationSolvang, CA

Posted 06 April 2023 - 01:11 AM

My educational background is Physics and Business Administration.  My professional experience is the design, construction and testing of highly calibrated (NIST traceable) airborne and spaceborne scientific instruments. 


In addition, I have a lifelong interest in the environment and I am a lifelong avid outdoors person.  As a consequence I have done a lot of reading of journal papers and articles on environmental and technology topics including environmental issues.

I have to confess that while the promise of EVs is intriguing, I remain somewhat skeptical of the hype around EVs.  Much of the promise and marketing is centered on emissions during use. 

The environmental impacts of EVs from the huge increase required in mining the raw materials at the beginning of life and disposal of the components (primarily the batteries) at the end of life are estimates often assuming technology and process improvements that do not presently exist. The optimistic estimates seem to be more promise than fact since the scale of the mining needed to provide the materials for the 100's of millions of batteries and the recycling processes to separate out the heavy metals from millions of batteries and other environmentally unfriendly materials do not yet exist on a scale that is meaningful relative to replacing vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICEs). 

I acknowledge there is a lot of promise for Evs and it would be cool if the promise became reality but based on my 45 years in engineering I think it is appropriate for one to be cautious and even skeptical of the optimistic projections that involve massive and rapid increases of scale. Consider that corporations have a long and sordid history of low side compliance, deceptive and even illegal practices when it comes to mining and waste disposal (end of life Solar panels are presently a good example).

Here is an excerpt from a life cycle comparison of EVs vs ICs (one of several I have read). 

"Considering that the battery is the core component of EVs, we further summarise the environmental impacts of battery production, use, secondary utilisation, recycling, and remanufacturing. The results showed that the environmental impact of EVs in the production phase is higher than that of ICEVs due to battery manufacturing. EVs in the use phase obtained a better overall image than ICEVs, although this largely depended on the share of clean energy generation. In the recycling phase, repurposing and remanufacturing retired batteries are helpful in improving the environmental benefits of EVs. Over the entire life cycle, EVs have the potential to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and fossil energy consumption; however, they have higher impacts than ICEVs in terms of metal and mineral consumption and human toxicity potential."

Note the use of the word potential - this is important because the recycling systems do not yet exist at a meaningful scale.  All the recycling and even the ramp up of the mining is based on somewhat  estimates which may be rather optimistic.   Also note that the human toxicity threat is frequently soft pedaled.










Edited by ckent323, 06 April 2023 - 01:28 AM.

  • 4

1993 Dodge Cummins W-250 Club Cab long bed, 2007 FWC Keystone

#23 Gooseberry



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 06 April 2023 - 06:36 PM

Thanks again for insights and expertise. I agree that scaling is going to be difficult. Still, what is the alternative? Our current fossil fuel system is simply unsustainable. Climate impacts are already being felt in a serious enough manner that they threaten our global economic and social systems. Food and water insecurity combined with mass migration, drought and severe weather already impact our world. Climate disruption is here, and unfortunately it will just get worse. We need to transition to a new paradigm, and we need to do it fast. Are there hurdles that need to be cleared? Yes. Can we clear them? I hope so. Europe is an excellent example of how fast it can happen. Adoption rates have skyrocketed across the continent.


It is difficult to imagine that the toxicity of mining lithium will be a greater health threat than fossil fuels. One in five deaths worldwide is directly attributable to fossil fuel pollution. https://www.hsph.har...aths-worldwide/. This number doesn’t include indirect deaths from environmental destruction, forced migration, government destabilization, and war associated with fossil fuel production. The overall numbers will just increase as the pollution and impacts get worse. Again, change is essential. I try to to be optimistic. There are numerous studies on the cradle to grave impacts of ICE vs BEV going back decades. This is settled science. No serious argument can be made that ICE is superior in this regard. The language that you refer to supports that conclusion. The grid will just get cleaner, and the gap will widen.

Tesla just released a white paper yesterday that you may find interesting. https://electrek.co/...Plan-Part-3.pdf. It is a detailed analysis of just what will be required to make the transition. They very well may be optimistic, but the numbers are in the paper. Have at it. I’d love to hear your impressions and learn from your expertise. At least, unlike empty CCS dreams and failed promises, the paper does not rely on technological solutions that don’t yet exist. In fact, battery advances will be forthcoming. BYD already has sodium based batteries in mass production and use in BEVs: https://seekingalpha...nt-forget-tesla. Other chemistry advances will no doubt be commercialized. Cobalt use has already fallen greatly in battery production. With LFP and other chemistries it won’t be needed: https://en.wikipedia...osphate_battery. Tesla’s new motor does not use rare earths. Additional progress will be made.


As for recycling, you may want to check out Redwood Materials as an example: https://www.redwoodm...ecycle-with-us/. They are a Lithium battery recycling company that will scale. Let’s just say it has sufficient financial backing. That market will mature. Presently, they target batteries from consumer electronics. The size of the problem with regard to phones and tablets is currently greater than with BEVS. The total life cycle of large battery packs should be decades. As it is, most all of those batteries made available due to accidents are reused. They have high value. I don’t expect that to ever change. Solar panel recycling is also beginning to scale. There is a large solar recycling center not far from where I live. These are all solvable problems. We need to stop burning stuff. There is no choice. 

As to the CT, Tesla indicated in the white paper that it will have a 100 kWh pack. That may be an average across platforms, but we can expect high energy density, efficiency, and relatively low weight. We have been stuck in an era of inefficiency for decades. There is plenty of low hanging fruit in truck design and manufacturing to improve overall cost and efficiency. Hopefully, we are finally started down that track. Cheers. 

  • 1

#24 OutToLunch


    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 112 posts

Posted 26 April 2023 - 10:37 PM

Latecomer to this discussion, but I would like to point out that EVs are often portrayed as “silver bullets” solutions, but only address symptoms of the problem and not the causes.  The cause that they do not address is usage or consumption.  Our life style is energy intensive and increasingly so.  EVs do not address that issue.


An additional danger is what economists refer to as a moral hazard.  An example of a moral hazard is when a product is made safer, people tend to engage in more dangerous behavior or become less conscious of what is happening putting them in greater danger.  For the sake of an example, let’s say that EVs pollute half as much as ICEVs.  If people’s usage does not change then we have a win.  However, if people react to polluting less per mile driven by driving twice as much, we have a wash.  Given human behavior, we should expect some increase in miles driven as people feel that they are polluting less with each mile driven.  Note that when energy prices resulted in higher mpg, gasoline consumption did not go down.  People just drove their higher mpg vehicles more.

  • 1

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users