Chicago-area Tesla charging stations lined with dead cars in freezing cold: 'A bunch of dead robots out here'
Many Chicago-area Tesla owners were visibly frustrated on Monday after their electric vehicles failed to charge amid freezing temperatures.
OT: Its good we do not have this issue here
- Thread starter tbaydog
- Start date
- Status
Global warmingChicago-area Tesla charging stations lined with dead cars in freezing cold: 'A bunch of dead robots out here'
Many Chicago-area Tesla owners were visibly frustrated on Monday after their electric vehicles failed to charge amid freezing temperatures.finance.yahoo.com
I don't get how anyone can view an EV other than situational. For some, that situation might be 99% of the time. For others, it's likely 10% of the time.
I think about EV ownership exactly 0% of the time.
Personally I find it to be one of the most ignorant idea ever hatched. It's simply not feasible at this point in time. The whole green energy scheme is not feasible. Turbines freeze up and solar panels cover with snow. Just non sensical and anyone with common sense can see that. Maybe one day. Plus have you ever seen where they do the mining. Plus most of the profits go straight to China. Oh wait ? Hmm
If they were priced like a golf cart, I would buy one. Use it as a grocery getter and taking kids to practice. Other than that, I find them useless in my situation. Teslas are the Stanley cups for yuppies.
Follow the money on all of these green energy schemes.
So you think Elon Musk is a crook?
Bottom line is, hybrid is the way to go. Use the electric part to decrease the gas consumption. That's the logical way of looking at things.
wait you mean battery performance is diminished in extreme cold weather? Who would think?Chicago-area Tesla charging stations lined with dead cars in freezing cold: 'A bunch of dead robots out here'
Many Chicago-area Tesla owners were visibly frustrated on Monday after their electric vehicles failed to charge amid freezing temperatures.
IF it's ever perfected, hydrogen will be the future. Not electric (battery). I've got a feeling the electric car lobby will be too strong to ever allow hydrogen powered cars to develop and be perfected.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't clutch your pearls and denigrate either EV owners, or non-EV owners, depending on your preference. Tribalism, otherism and hating anyone who doesn't think like you is the order of the day. Get with the times...
I think that Toyota has had the most measured and logical approach.
Yep, electric and some alternative will end up being the long term solution. Electric alone doesn't give you the travel distance capability. Hydrogen with electric would do that if gas stations can provide interchangeable cells. The automakers need to develop a standard for the hydrogen cells now.
Don't bring logical reasoning into the conversation. We must completely ignore that there's a reasonable solution that meets in the middle of any topic.
Plug in hybrids work for nearly anyone and everyone. They wouldn't overwhelm the grid and they'll cut your annual gasoline consumption by 2/3rds while still allowing for long trips in remote areas. Electric mode is fun to drive, quiet, and saves $ for 90% of my running around. Yet I can still take the off-road trails into the back country for days or drive 350 miles in sub zero temps without having to stop.
I had a Ford Energi which was a hybrid/electric vehicle that I charged every night. It would go about 30 miles all electric then switch over to hybrid. It was a great looking 4 door Fusion. I could go to work and back on electric only. I averaged 55 MPH and only had to fill the tank once a month. I traded it in because the 8 year electrical system warranty was nearing its end and I didn't want to pay for a replacement battery. When I filed my taxes each year I had to pay the EV tax so that offset some of the fuel savings.
An EV would be fine for me about 85% of the time. But as a 1-car household, there's a 0% chance I'll ever get a total electric car. Biggest problem with an EV is the payback period. You really only get a decent payback period for your initial investment if it's a high mileage vehicle. But the inherent limitations of taking an EV on the 1,300 mile road trip I just got back from make that unworkable.
Is Elon behind the green energy push or just making money off it?
A fine example of Democrat foresight. Phase out the combustion engine, brilliant!*
I have had an EV for a YEAR. I am happy with mine and I drive it daily. Are their kinks? Damn right but it is so much cheaper to operate that I do not think I will ever go back to an ICE. I am saving hundreds every month on fuel, maintenance and frankly this thing is fast as hell and fun to drive. Is it perfect hell no, but there are more car fires in gas burners than EVs fir
You guys keep on hating something you know nothing about other than it’s new and different.
everything is not political or out to get you
You guys keep on hating something you know nothing about other than it’s new and different.
everything is not political or out to get you
I guess I don't have much against them other than they aren't as clean as the tree hugging crowd wants everybody to think when you take into consideration the mining of the battery material, disposal of the batteries, and that most energy sources of charging them come from fossil fuels. There aren't many solar charging stations (useless this time of year anyway) and I've never heard of a wind driven one.
My commute is 10 minutes each way and my longest drive in town is 9 miles, makes no since for that type driving. On the other hand my kids live 5 hrs away in different directions, again makes no since for me unless I want to pull in at Buckees along the way to recharge and get some brisket and Beaver Nuts**
My commute is 10 minutes each way and my longest drive in town is 9 miles, makes no since for that type driving. On the other hand my kids live 5 hrs away in different directions, again makes no since for me unless I want to pull in at Buckees along the way to recharge and get some brisket and Beaver Nuts**
Last edited:
This reminds me of a lecture back in college when lo and behold, our instructor was talking about hydrogen, fuel cells, etc. Anyway, he mentioned that one of the big reasons that hydrogen hadn’t caught on was due to the public’s perception of danger, to which he responded… have any of y’all ever seen a gas tank explode?
EV are better for the environment and it’s not close but you do have to drive it many miles to make that to be true. Last I saw it was about 70,000 miles to break even on the environmental affect as every mile you drive with no emissions but that is not why I bought it. I am all about $$$.
Even with my cost savings monthly it will be 2-4 years before I make up the cost difference but I normally keep cars 1-2 decades and drive them forever.
In the meantime, they are fun to drive, 0-60 is unreal and I charge at home.
trips? I don’t seem to have any issues as there are hundreds of places to charge and many are complimentary.
I do hope they come up with that solid state battery that Toyota proclaims to be bringing to the market. They do that, and everyone will consider it if those things turn out to be as good as they say. 1000 range would change a lot!
Six Packers protesting the latest innovation...................it will never work.
Last edited:
Yeah! Go get em tbay and give em hell! And while you are at it, lets point to how no combustion engine vehicles refused to start in Chicago or all over the Upper Midwest these last few days! Oh, wait...
Once again-
- EVs arent for everyone and ICE vehicles are very much available for those that dont want or cant afford an EV. My most recent vehicle was an ICE vehicle and I plan to have that thing for the next decade- keep that in mind if you choose to respond to this post.
- Brutally cold temps have bricked vehicles for decades. I grew up int the Chicago metro and can remember many vehicles, mine included, not starting. Heck, my Honda Pilot didnt start 2 years ago due to absurdly cold temps so I had to get a new battery.
- Cold temps have paralyzed infrastructure in the South that wouldnt paralyze the North and laughing at that situation is also lame.
Ha, I have come to appreciate tbay's bulldoggedness when it comes to highlighting Chicago in every negative way possible. Never change.
Once again-
- EVs arent for everyone and ICE vehicles are very much available for those that dont want or cant afford an EV. My most recent vehicle was an ICE vehicle and I plan to have that thing for the next decade- keep that in mind if you choose to respond to this post.
- Brutally cold temps have bricked vehicles for decades. I grew up int the Chicago metro and can remember many vehicles, mine included, not starting. Heck, my Honda Pilot didnt start 2 years ago due to absurdly cold temps so I had to get a new battery.
- Cold temps have paralyzed infrastructure in the South that wouldnt paralyze the North and laughing at that situation is also lame.
Ha, I have come to appreciate tbay's bulldoggedness when it comes to highlighting Chicago in every negative way possible. Never change.
ICE vehicles are not being phased out any more than Obama came for your guns(He didnt, if you can remember and be honest. Gun sales increased thru his presidency and both pieces of legislation related to guns failed to pass the Senate in '13, shortly after Sandy Hook.) and to claim ICE vehicles are being phased out is disingenuous at best and perpetuating a lie at worst.
California deciding last year to end new ICE sales in 2035(more than a decade from now) is not good evidence to support your claim.
- It is specific to just that state.
- It doesnt ban ICE vehicles that already exist or that are purchased outside the state.
- It doesnt keep you from buying ICE vehicles now or even in the next decade in that state.
- It doesnt keep you from buying ICE vehicles elsewhere, even after 2035.
^ clearly not a hockey fan.
...really though, I hate them too. Our gym used to be filled with them for volleyball practice until I went full Old Man on the girls and banned em. Well, the open straw style was banned. If the lid closes and water doesnt spill, its still allowed. We had a program talk where I said its dumb to bring em since those things get blown up like bowling pins due to volleyballs hitting them, but if they dont mind dented and scratched $45 water holders, then so be it.
I’d respect your opinions more if you didn’t intentionally post misinformation & lies. When one of the largest & most influential states institutes a ban on something starting in 11 years, that is the definition of phasing it out.
I'm a big fan of EVs and gays - the more the better - leaves more petrol and pussssy for the rest of gas-guzzling, red-blooded American males.
To where?
- To private businesses employing people and making a few people rich? That isnt insightful, its obvious.
- To some nefarious cabal of politicians profiting thru shell corporations? That sounds juicy, give details!
China is the biggest financial winner out of the green energy push.
Let them. If it works then other states might follow. If it doesn't that opens up the opportunity for Republicans to win national elections if they embrace policies and candidates that most Americans support.
"Follow the money" is a phrase that can pretty much be applied to almost any public policy on the right or left. The left uses that phrase quite often.
Maybe. So. It's been a big financial winner of our trade and foreign policy over the past couple of decades as well.
You’re not saving hundreds every month on fuel & maintenance. You’re just not. At best fuel savings are 75%. Maybe $100 per month fuel. Maintenance is almost a wash, with EV coming in at $300 less over 5 years per KBB study.
Last edited:
I didnt post misinformation or lies. I straight up address California. I then gave my view why that isnt applicable to the claim that ICE vehicles are being phased out. That is 11 years in the future and is only 1 state.
Ill let you in on a secret, but dont tell others- not only will other states follow, some already have- MA, MD, NY, CT, CO, WA, OR, VT, and NJ. Those are states that choose to follow CARB instead of Federal Emissions Standards, from what I understand.
- They can choose not to follow CARB and back out of this in the coming years, if the tech doesnt look like it will work in time.
- It was expected that these states would all jump on board and while some have, others explicitly havent. CT doesnt have legislative support as of 2 months ago. CO isnt following CARB on this and has its own expectation metrics for EV/ICE in the coming decade.
I offer this up since it isnt just CA and dont want you or others to actually read up on this and claim I am somehow posting more misinformation.
So thoroughness is needed(a rarity in a sea of SPS hot takes).
New sales of ICE vehicles will not be allowed in CA(and other states) in more than a decade from now.
With all that said, it still does not mean the combustion engine is being phased out, which was the claim that I initially responded to.
- All those restrictive states will still allow ICE vehicles to be registered and used in the state. So the combustion engine is still allowed in those states.
- 80% of states currently plan to still allow new ICE vehicles sales in a decade. So the combustion engine is still allowed in those states.
- Used ICE vehicles can still be bought and sold in CA and other states(they have to adopt the same verbiage or follow Fed laws, I believe).
- PHEVs qualify as part of CA's Zero Emissions compliance. PHEVs have a gas engine, to be clear.
Yes, some states are pushing towards a change in how personal vehicles that are sold new in their state use energy to create movement.
No, the combustion engine is not being phased out as it can still exist for new sales in other states, still be driven and registered in ICE banned states, can be bought and sold used in ICE banned states, and can even be sold new in ICE banned states in the form of PHEVs.
- Status