• Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    178
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Wasn’t like… a huge deal made about how the Teslas are so waterproof they could double as a boat? I mean they can in fact ford much deeper than ICE cars because they don’t need air, but also there’s definitely tweets about this.

    Edit: he said it about both the cybertruck - loads of stories about this - and the model S: https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a21421/elon-musk-model-s-boat/

    This is entirely separate of course from the much more basic issue that a car that breaks because of some fucking precipitation is not fit for purpose and this damage report would be indefensible just about anywhere in the world. Precedent for manufacturers taking responsibility for bad products was first established in Britain centuries ago.

    • Krotiuz@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And not to mention it was water ingress into the bloody batteries, they’re lucky (or maybe unlucky in this case) that the car didn’t burn down from the Lithium…

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah… that’s the one part you need to waterproof, more even than the passenger cabin. Everything else except the ECU is water-agnostic. Those battery cells will discharge and die if you leave them submerged. The pack itself is fine for short spells under water if it is properly made.

    • sugartits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is entirely separate of course from the much more basic issue that a car that breaks because of some fucking precipitation is not fit for purpose and this damage report would be indefensible just about anywhere in the world.

      Two things here…

      The source of this is …The Mirror. Not exactly top shelf journalism. They thrive of outage, just like the Daily Fail. Keep that in mind when reading these trash sources.

      I suspect the owner of the vehicle did a lot more than “drive it in a bit of rain” and is simply lying about it in order to try and get bailed out. Funnily enough I’ve not seen a queue of Tesla’s broken down every time I drive in the rain.

      It’s certainly possible that the owner is telling the truth. But I doubt it. I doubt it a lot.

      • sizzler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve recovered Teslas that have “failed” in the rain. It means a moisture sensor has triggered. The car tells you they it can get to where you need to go but then will need to be serviced. It’s a “first” generation problem rather than anything inherently wrong with electric cars.

        • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It means a moisture sensor has triggered.

          Moisture sensors don’t typically cost $21k. They said the batteries were full of water.

          • sizzler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            They said the batteries were full of water

            I think we can assume the moisture sensor was triggered then.

          • Heggico@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Which is the part I don’t really understand. Aren’t these batteries pretty much all watercooled? Maybe the control electronics got wet causing it to keep the battery on in a flooded condition and thus draining them completely? Maybe just the moisture senser tripped, causing them to say, yeah, water damage, gotta replace it?

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue is the statement by the Tesla rep that bad weather was the cause. Now we don’t have any confirmation they said that, but it would take nothing for Tesla to categorically deny that that is an acceptable reason to deny warranty, and state that any rep saying that was at fault. There. Done. Non-story.

        If they can’t categorically deny that then that implies they actually are employing this excuse for their shoddy workmanship. It certainly wouldn’t be the scummiest thing the company has done.

        • steakmeout@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          What statement? What you read was not a statement but hearsay in the form of a vaguely retold exchange.

          Fuck Elon and Tesla but this isn’t much to go on.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They got a statement from Tesla who said they were “investigating”. You don’t need to investigate to know that this is a bullshit reason to give, and their silence on that issue speaks volumes. Now, if the statements by the customers were not given to the Tesla rep to respond to, they would have ample opportunity to put out a statement explaining the problems with the article. Have they done that, or is it just silence? Any media rep worth their salt is absolutely going to be aware of this article.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unless a tree fell on the car it shouldn’t stop running because of some wind & rain. This is basic stuff, I don’t know why people don’t get this.

            • Pipoca@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Rain kills cars literally all the time when idiots drive them through flooded roads.

            • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              “Some wind and rain”. The Edinburgh and Cannonmill area, where this story is from, has had at least two floods this month severe enough to submerge parked vehicles.

            • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Have you not heard of flooding?

              This is basic stuff, I don’t know why people don’t get this.

              Perhaps it’s the other way around?

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I know someone who had to get their Tesla repaired after driving in a puddle. I don’t know the size or depth of the puddle though.

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is not as easy, I mean they’re are some things that makes it easier than ICE, but electronical components also cannot get wet and those big boats run on fossil fuel after all.

      But what’s ridiculous is that rain could damage it (from article doesn’t sound like car was flooded, as that would be understandable).

      Yesterday I saw comment: imagine that the typical home printer was your car. That’s the experience of typical Tesla owner.

      This seems to match the article.

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Except most BEVs absolutely can ford shallow rivers. They’re better at it than ICE cars because of the intake issue.

        And the electronics on any vehicle needs to be water proof too. Although I’ve seen an iffroad tesla mod where they actually said that opening holes in the bottom of the ECU waterproofing was essential to allow water to flow out, rather than sealing it up completely like Tesla had done. That was the problem that killed their first motherboard in that project.

        Also note there’s a difference between electronics and electrics. The electric motors dgaf about water, they work flooded or dry. The logic circuits are the really vulnerable part.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yesterday I saw comment: imagine that the typical home printer was your car. That’s the experience of typical Tesla owner.

        Can you expand? I live in a wealthy liberal area, the cross section of people who want to show their wealth with fancy cars and also want to virtue signal that they care about the environment, so there are a bunch of Teslas around here. I also have a few close friends and family that have them. I’ve heard overwhelmingly good things about the cars from these people. All of the complaints have been minor quibbles.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tesla owners down play it, but basically every study/survey agrees that Tesla has terrible reliability. It’s not just the electric car parts, it’s everything. You can call it minor that door handles stick, or windows break, loss of power steering, leaking moon roofs, touch screens being non-responsive, and more.

          • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Those studies usually fail to account for the ease of service with Tesla. You can schedule service from the app and most of the time they will send a mobile technician to you at home or at work or wherever you want to service the vehicle, so people are more likely to schedule appointments for minor issues.

      • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, what if I never had a problem with a printer? I realize I might be just lucky, but I never got the fuss about broken printers.

        Now if we’re talking 3D printer, yeah, that shit needs constant repair.

        • Norodix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          3D printers have obvious and fixable defects. When they break you can see the broken part, you can diagnose and fix it. Regular printers are just fuck you machines.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They didn’t used to be.

            And I suspect the same will happen with 3D printers over time.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’ve had my brother printer for around 10 years now with no problems. Assuming they are still made the same, I highly recommend them.

              • takeda@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Brother as far as I know produces only office printers. Most people that complain about printers talk about those home inkjet printers that they bundle with PCs.

                Kind of side note. 20 years ago I remember buying PC at best buy. It came with Canon (I think) printer. I told them that I didn’t want it, saying that I already had a printer at home going to get lower price. After the sales guy removed it, the price was actually higher. They apparently were paying them to include it.

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Pretty sure my brother is a home printer. It’s bulky, for sure, but that’s probably part of the reason why it has lasted so long. But yeah, I get what those people are complaining about. I bought a brother specifically because everyone always complains about crappy printers, so I looked up which one wasn’t crappy and paid the premium to have something I wouldn’t soon need to replace.

    • Hypx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      All BEVs will have similar problems. The battery pack is huge and cannot come into contact with water.

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        The battery pack is supposed to be watertight because that is an expected hazard for an outdoor vehicle. It absolutely can come in contact with water, which apart from some minor corrosion and discharge over time due to electrolysis, should not in the short term damage it. The ability to ford shallow rivers is absolutely normal in most BEVs.

        • Hypx@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          The problem is that it just slung underneath the car, exposed to whatever is beneath the car. You can try making it watertight, but water will eventually get it in wetter climates. That will be the problem of all BEVs with giant batteries.

          • nicetomeetyouIMVEGAN@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not “just slung”… The battery fulfills multiple functions as it is part of the chassis. And nobody is “trying” to make it watertight, it is literally engineered that way. We have made things weatersealed since forever, hell even cars just standing outside in wet cold climates won’t get wet inside even after decades. Yet we can’t make a rigid part of a chassis watertight? You’re grasping at straws brother. You have to crash before water gets in.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Grind Hard Plumbing did an offroad Tesla mod where their BEV expert suggested part of the problem was waterproofing everything completely, rather than allowing drain holes in the bottom. Tesla seems to think absolutely sealed batteries are the solution, but water will get in like you say, then it’s trapped.

            They had an issue with the motherboard grtting water damaged for the same reason. As long as the car is right-way-up, drain holes won’t allow much water in during immersion, but they will let it back out.

  • gjoel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    An AI tool was used to add an extra layer to the editing process for this story.

    For crying out loud, stop that!

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Okay so for starters this article is clearly just a dig at Elon. If it wasn’t they would never have mentioned him but Elon makes headlines.

    Second, I don’t buy it. We’re getting one side of the story here. They’ve been selling these cars by the millions for years at this point. If the cars were failing “while driving in the rain”, it would be a much bigger deal.

    The " Elon Musk could buy everyone in the world a Tesla if he wanted to." line makes it clear that this is just more Elon/Tesla clickbait.

  • deafboy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Elon Musk could buy everyone in the world a Tesla if he wanted to.

    Well, that would be $ 314 562 157 350 000. in other words, 3 times the global yearly GDP. But one can hardly expect a common sense from a tesla owner :D /s

        • Neon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tesla probably has a lot higher profit than other cars, since Teslas are a Status-Symbol rather than just a Car

          but yes

          • Sowhatever@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where in the world is Tesla a status symbol? Because I bought my M3P because I couldn’t afford a BMW i4 M50, let alone a iX or EQS/EQE AMG. The BMW is similar size and performance and costs 30% more.

            I still like it, but it was the compromise option.

              • Sowhatever@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not in the EU for sure. American cars have always been “lots of horsepower and low-ish quality for a low price”, and Tesla keeps the trend.

                • GreenM@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I only know rich people who buy Tesla in EU. Rest of the people are driving half the price combustion engine cars.

      • Webster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even if the cost was an impossibly low 10% of MSRP, that’s still $30 trillion dollars based on the math above and well more than he has.

        • GreenM@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why are you guys so literate about it. OP just used something called exaggeration.

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Due respect and support for Elon hatred, but this story is stupid. No one gets water ingress on a tesla battery from driving through puddles. The family didn’t want to pay for it, the horrible “newd” organization (I refuse to even name them) knows mentioning Elon makes better news, and this whole thing is an insurance issue and somehow Elon is mentioned.

    Quick, without looking, who is the CEO of Toyota, Honda, Chevrolet, or Ford?

    Even if you know, who cares? Exactly.

        • EnderMB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Usually because the Daily Mail and The Sun are worse, and because leaning towards the left/Labour let’s The Mirror off a bit in some people’s eyes.

        • vxx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because it fits the narrative of the slightly radicalised userbase.

  • PeroBasta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Incredible. I clicked to read the article, but there was no article! A title and a sentence.

  • elscallr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    John said he pressed representatives of Tesla on whether he or Rob were at fault for the damage, to which he claims he was told that it was a weather issue. He added: "They said that the battery is effectively submerged in water. How can that be our fault?

    The car got flooded, then? That’s an insurance problem not a repair problem.

  • masquenox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have zero sympathy for anyone that bought anything connected to Phony Stark. Zilch.

    You knew what you were buying into - you live with it.

    • cricket97@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I get everyone here loves to hate have hate boner for musk but any electric car will break down if submerged in water. If tesla’s were breaking from simply driving in the rain, you would have heard about it.

      • Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hell son, any car will break down when submerged. ICE cars don’t like inhaling water either.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you think a journalist might write a news article about a guy having a $17,000 repair bill after driving one in the rain to let us hear about it?

  • Renere@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    idc about this post but i clicked on the article anyway to see gay people

    that’s so cool…

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t about Elon. While it’s about one of his companies, Elon has little to nothing to do with this story.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        106
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes. It is not about Elon. It’s about the doomed nature of BEVs. Any technology that can give you a £17,000 repair bill just because it is wet means it is not a viable technology. Though it’s sad that people have been fooled by Elon’s bullshit about his companies. Which is why stories like this come up. Ultimately, BEVs are dead-end and this cannot be changed. It will be a matter of when BEVs are abandoned in the marketplace, not if.

        EDIT: Again, no amount of lying to yourself will change reality. BEVs are a dead-end and always will be.

        • Rooty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          76
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So a poorly made electric vehicle by one manufacturer means that the entire field is non-viable?

          EDIT: Lmao, check out this guy’s posts, every single comment is shitting on battery EVs and shilling hydrogen vehicles. I don’t know how much you’re being paid to shill for the fossil fuel industry, but I hope it’s enough.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            43
            ·
            1 year ago

            Lmao, check out this guy’s posts, every single comment is shitting on battery EVs and shilling hydrogen vehicles. I don’t know how much you’re being paid to shill for the fossil fuel industry, but I hope it’s enough.

            How many people are shilling for the BEV industry or Tesla? It is the biggest greenwashing scam of our time. Someone has to say something. You have reality reversed. It’s the pro-BEV people that are shills.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            61
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            All BEVs from everyone will have the same issues.

            EDIT: Lying to yourself will not change reality. A BEV will never be a low-resource type of vehicles. It is a matter of when, not if, it falls apart as an idea.

              • Hypx@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                34
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Explain to me how a car with a $20,000 battery can ever avoid a repair job of $20,000 once the battery dies? This is a problem that everyone will face.

                And in America, the land of SUVs and pick-up trucks, these costs will be even higher.

                EDIT: You won’t change economics by lying to yourself. BEVs are simply not viable. At least, not anything with a big battery.

                • bob_lemon@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  17
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This isn’t about the battery dying. It’s about Tesla failing miserably at building a water resistant enclosure for their batteries, them pretending that it’s somehow the customers fault.

                • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Explain to me how a car with a $20,000 battery can ever avoid a repair job of $20,000 once the battery dies?

                  It is quite easy.

                  A battery like that lasts longer than the car. It may not have done in the past, but it does do so today.

                  And if it breaks before then, you only need to replace a single cell to fix it.

                  Afterwards, you can just recycle and reuse those exotic metals used in its construction, so it doesn’t require more pollution to create.

                • Pipoca@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Fundamentally, you can’t. The same as how a gas car can’t avoid a $5k transmission or engine replacement. Cars being totaled due to their most expensive part failing isn’t really a new thing or unexpected. Beaters are sold for scrap literally every day because it’s not worth repairing them.

                  All cars have a limited lifetime. For ICE cars, that’s on average around 12 years, and things often start going wrong around ~150k miles. You can get particularly well-maintained cars to last much longer, but most people don’t. Classic cars are mostly a hobbyist thing for a reason.

                  The question isn’t “will the battery eventually die”, its “will the battery last 15-20 years while still having 60-80% of its initial capacity?”

                  And based on real-world data, the answer appears to be “yes, unless you have a lemon or really abuse your battery.” Lemons are also nothing new.

                • ArumiOrnaught@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not one giant battery, but arrays of smaller batteries. At least that has been my experience with them. Battery goes bad and you replace that array. Not 20k but closer to 2k.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            26
            ·
            1 year ago

            A fuel cell stack has a few hundred dollars worth of platinum. The rest is just conventional materials like steel or plastic. Not very expensive. The whole stack is very small too, weighing just 50kg for an average car.

            So with mass production, it will be less than a combustion engine. You’ll get more savings by getting rid of the transmission and catalytic convertor. You pencil out the cost, and going with “first principles,” the whole vehicle will be the same or less than a conventional ICE car.

            • zurohki@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, and an EV battery has a few hundreds of dollars worth of materials in it too, but somehow they’re always going to be tens of thousands of dollars and fuel cells will get cheaper due to mass production?

              • Hypx@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Actually no. It has thousands of dollars of raw materials in it. That’s why BEVs can’t go behind a certain cost floor. But FCEVs can.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think the people buying Teslas are doing so because they believe them to be an economically viable option. They’re buying Teslas for the brand recognition/design more than anything.

  • Hypx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    100
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Reminder to everyone in this thread: BEVs are a doomed technology. The fundamental high cost and resource requirements of the battery dooms it to inevitable failure. Luckily, superior technology like FCEVs are coming along now. They won’t have this problem. So if you actually cared about solving climate change, you’ll endorse FCEVs, just like any other kind of zero emission car. Even if you don’t agree with me, you should still support anything that can get us off of fossil fuels. There is no coherent reason to oppose green technology after all.

    But of course, this is not the case. Many people here have either been brainwashed by Elon Musk, or have some financial motive like investments in BEV companies. As a result, they do not care for any kind of alternative to the BEV. They only want the BEV. And they will lie and BS endlessly to prop up their favored technology.

    Unfortunately, reality does not care for your opinions. The BEV is a dead-end, and always will be. You can’t save it by lying to yourself or others. You have no choice to admit the truth. By not doing so, you are just becoming another group of conspiracy theorists or science deniers. We make fun of anti-vaxxers or climate deniers, and eventually we will make fun of hydrogen deniers. That is the eventual outcome if you cannot change your mind.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        36
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Last I checked, a lot of countries are planning to ban all competing technologies, or subsidizing BEVs to an insane amount. If you realize that this is basically a doomed strategy, then your next act is pretty obvious.

        In the end, our motivation is about solving climate change. And we see a lot of brainwashed fools wasting their time and money on a dead-end idea that won’t work. It’s pretty much impossible not to bring up the alternative. Not doing so would be a major moral failure on our own part. So it has to be brought up. Guys like you are just annoyed that someone is telling you something you don’t want to hear.

    • Nightsoul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m all for FCEVs but they are a long way off from mass consumption simply because you can’t fuel them at home like you can with a BEV. They need to seriously start building out hydrogen fueling stations for then be considered a viable alternative.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a motivation for building them out as quickly as possible. Saying that it is an excuse to not doing anything really reveals that you’re not being serious about stopping climate change.

        After all, millions of people will need some kind of public charging/refuel system anyways. So it’s not like this problem can be ignored.

    • Dremor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t see why something that works today won’t tomorrow. I got a BEV for years (Renault Zoe), rode it under a lot of rain, never got any problem.

      At worst this only shows a lack of quality from Tesla, not from the whole industry.

      FCEV has a lot of downside that BEV don’t, and same goes the other way. Those two technologies are complementary, but FCEVs lack the necessary infrastructure, be it for distribution or production.

      Currently, most of the hydrogen used comes from fossil fuel as current electrolysis technologies have too much loss of potential energy, and has to be sold at a far higher price than fossil fuel based hydrogen as a result.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Once these BEVs get older and more corroded, we will see a lot of issues.

        FCEVs have massive advantages over BEVs. They are just some years away from mass production and adoption.

        Most arguments against them are years or even decades out of date. There isn’t anything holding back green hydrogen anymore. It will be both widespread and cheap pretty soon. It is basically following the same cost curve as wind, solar, even batteries themselves.

        • Dremor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          FCEV isn’t immune to corrosion, as is any vehicle. And if the fuel cell leaks, considering the volatility of hydrogen, you are at risk of a pretty big exposition. BEV has its own risk, but at least you have a chance to get out of the car and save your life.

          And unfortunately the arguments are not out of date, unfortunately. Hydrogen production is still a big problem, as is the distribution network and storage (albeit this side is far better now than it was in the past, it is far from being good enough to deal with the smallest atom in existence).

          BEV have a lot of advantages over FCEV. They can be recharged pretty much anywhere, they can be used as battery storage to make a resilient renewable based power grid, and battery can be reused as static electricity storage once their autonomy goes below the often used 70% threshold, and can be recycled pretty well (ironically the problem isn’t the technology but the lack of batteries to recycle, as there is very little BEV that get scrapped currently).

          Moreover new battery technologies are on the way to help with a lot of it’s downsides, like ones that don’t catch fire, or smaller one to get better autonomy.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            FCEVs are much less flammable than BEVs. They’ve been on the road of years, even a decade+. None of that has happened. And carbon fiber doesn’t really corrode, so it is incredibly safe all around.

            Again, FCEVs have massive advantages over batteries. Including all of the same advantages of availability and green energy sources. Remember, FCEVs are literally EVs. They work the same way and have all the same basic advantages.

            They just also happen to be able to refuel in minutes and have 400 miles of range. Plus much less raw material challenges. None of the supposed solutions of BEVs can even touch what FCEVs provide from day one.

            And of course, BEV fanatics always resort to “magical batteries from the future.” Never once allowing for the possibility of superior fuel cells in the future.

            • Dremor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              FCEVs are much less flammable than BEVs.

              I agree with you on that. That’s one of the main current generation BEV weak points. But that’s not something that can’t be changed. FCEVs are not as flammable, but they are surely explosive. But in both case, a lot of security measures exists, and danger comes from quality defect, not the lack of security.

              They’ve been on the road of years, even a decade+.

              As for BEV. I could also add more than a century for BEV (early cars were electric, but died out due to batteries being far too primitive at the time).

              None of that has happened.

              https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/hydrogen-fuel-cell-car-california-explosion/

              https://electrek.co/2019/06/11/hydrogen-station-explodes-toyota-halts-sales-fuel-cell-cars/

              And there are other occurrences, just go do a Google search.

              And carbon fiber doesn’t really corrode, so it is incredibly safe all around.

              Carbon fiber can be used on BEV too. But in both case it cost way too much to be viable other than for supercars.

              Including all of the same advantages of availability and green energy sources.

              Tell me, have you seen a lot of at home hydrogen recharge station. Have you seen a lot of hydrogen recharge stations in parking ? Both are true for BEVs

              They work the same way and have all the same basic advantages.

              The engine yes, not the energy storage. And a lot of EVs advantage and inconvenience are due to that part.

              They just also happen to be able to refuel in minutes and have 400 miles of range. Plus much less raw material challenges.

              I don’t deny that. And that’s why both technologies are complementary. FCEV for long range, far from home, BEV for medium to short ranges, when you can charge it at home.
              On another hand, fast charger are more and more commonplace, and can recharge a $50000 BEV in less than 30 minutes. Just the time to go touch some grass, drink a cup of coffee, or do something else. It is required to take a break while driving from time to time, so why not ? Considering the pace at which fast charging is going, a 10 minutes fill up isn’t that far fetched.

              None of the supposed solutions of BEVs can even touch what FCEVs provide from day one.

              Depends of your uses. For mine, FCEV have far to much disadvantages over BEV to be viable.

              And of course, BEV fanatics always resort to “magical batteries from the future.” Never once allowing for the possibility of superior fuel cells in the future.

              I can say the same about magical hydrogen production and storage facilities for FCEVs.

              What you don’t understand is that I’m not critical as much about FCEVs than I am about the agressive and borderline irrational your stance is.

              Both technologies are good. Both have a future. And more importantly, both have an important role to play to decarbonate of our civilization.

              “You are not wrong, you’re just an asshole”, The Big Lebowski

              • Hypx@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                Then don’t come out and claim that FCEVs are a bad idea. If you know that they can work, then support them fully.

                Imagine a world where wind supporter vigorously attack solar power. That would be insane! That’s also what is happening now with FCEVs. It just happens that FCEVs, due to their lower resource needs, will play a much larger role than BEVs. But BEV fanatics cannot accept this at all. So rational people should know better than to swallow their lies.

                • Dremor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Imagine a world where wind supporter vigorously attack solar power.

                  You say that and then proceed to vigorously attack BEVs. Quite ironic isn’t it?

                  I just point out that FCEVs are, like BEVs, a flawed technology at this time. If it wasn’t the adoption would have been immediate. Both still need a lot of R&D, and both will get better. BEVs are in no way a doomed technology like you said earlier. It is just different from FCEVs.

    • Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you actually cared about the environment, you’d walk, bike or take transit. Cars are bad for cities, people and ecology

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually yes. Cars are for special purposes. They should not be driven that much.

    • superguy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reminder to everyone in this thread:

      Anyone who starts off their post with stuff like this is probably an idiot that shouldn’t be taken seriously.

      These are the folks who never touch grass.

        • sugartits@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you. That’s how children behave. Not adults.

          You are genuinely mentally ill. Get help.

            • sugartits@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re the one rabidly pushing a technology that nobody is buying for some reason.

              As soon as anybody disagrees with you (which is basically everyone) you respond with irrational anger, hate and swearing.

              That’s not normal. It’s not healthy.

              You need help. Get it.