When we posted last week about Rhys Millen’s ambitious target of breaking the nine-minute barrier at the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb behind the wheel of his Hankook Tires backed Drive eO PP100 EV, it attracted an unsurprising amount of attention both here and across our social media channels. Electric vehicles continue to divide us, especially when it comes to dedicated applications as in motorsport.
Some have heralded EVs as a new dawn for motorsport, quoting their instant torque, 100 per cent efficiency and in this particular case, their ability to deal with high altitudes with zero power loss. On the other hand, others are raising their concerns about an electric future in motorsport. We all know that traditional fossil fuelled vehicles are detrimental to the environment, but regardless, there’s something about a high-revving or boosted motor that sets the hairs standing on the back of our necks. It’s a more difficult argument to justify, as we want our race cars to retain their soul, something that’s intangible, but regardless still vital to how we experience and enjoy motorsport.
Rhys took time in between practice sessions at Pikes Peak this week to answer some of the questions that you posed to him, so let’s hear what he had to say…
JonathanW: What was the budget for this project? And how does that break down between chassis and EV power train?
Rhys Millen: Unfortunately, I am not aware of the total program cost, but the battery packs cost $40,000, and each Yasa motor, of which there are seven, are $15,000 each.
VittorioJano: Did you set up a weight limit and then work your way from there on how much battery capacity you can have, and from there on how much power you can have?
RM: A build like this really starts with the tire size, as that determines 95 per cent of the overall vehicle size. Based on the amount of torque we knew we wanted, we chose the largest contact patch of racing-style slick available: 320/710-18 front and rear, mounted on a 18×13-inch wheel. Once you calculate things like the footprint of the wheel and tire, axle lengths and suspension travel, the vehicle’s measurements become rather large. With its size and power output, and calculating the battery weight required to power the motors, the car weighs 2,686lbs, but that is 600 to 800lbs lighter than our competition.
Mike: Do you feel nostalgic to some degree, being aware that it is a time when EVs are taking over fuel-powered machines at competitions like Pikes Peak?
RM: It’s very exciting to be a part of a team leading technology and performance in EV race cars. We are setting the standard for others to follow and even beating out manufacturer supported programs. The power levels are amazing, the torque force on your body is amazing, and I’m so excited to be able to drive such an impressive vehicle.
miwe1998: How do you feel about motorsport without the smell of petrol?
RM: I have to admit it’s a little upsetting to not hear a finely tuned engine, smell the start up and listen to the roar as it leaves the line. But as a driver experiencing the torque delivery, the force is so impressive under load it cancels out all those elements that are lost.
The Jash: Have you thought about an 1190kW drift car?
RM: A full-electric competition drift car would be awesome. There are a few challenges that would need to be built into the design, but the power and torque would far exceed a standard drift car set-up.
Trogdor: How do you feel the spirit of the race [PPIHC] has changed over the years, as it has gone from what was a rally climb into a paved climb the entire route? Looking at this car in particular, it looks much more like a dedicated track car than a rally monster; how have the driving dynamics changed? Do you believe it is safer now or more dangerous with higher speeds?
RM: The event dynamics have changed and so has the technology in our vehicle. While I was a pure fan of the all-dirt road and rally style of driving, I am super excited to expand my skill set and a new challenge of driving style. The car does require very smooth and precise inputs in steering and even more so on throttle as there are no traction control or ABS devices.
Paddy McGrath: Usually engine performance deteriorates as altitude increases, so when driving the EV, how do the tires cope with receiving the same power throughout the duration of the climb?
RM: This year has been a big challenge in balancing the increased torque output to tire compound. Hankook produced two new compounds and we have had to heat cycle them as the compound is very soft; the road temperature is very warm this year and the torque force can destroy the tire in just four to five miles. We have found a perfect balance with a soft compound in the rear and a medium compound in the front to protect the front steering and driving tires.
Artis: I would like to know how Rhys came to the decision to jump onboard with a very small Latvian family-owned team (in comparison to other factory teams) and race their car towards the clouds? I have been following the Drive eO builds since they raced electric OsCar in Dakar, and with the Pikes Peak project it was clear they needed an experienced driver to capitalize on the capabilities of the car. It was a surprise last year that a rockstar like Rhys would jump behind the wheel of a car built in a small garage by few people on the other side of the world. Fingers crossed for Drive eO! Greetings from Latvia.
RM: My father [Rod] raced for Toyota in an electric car up Pikes Peak in 2012, and at that time he witnessed the build quality, passion and experience of the small team from Latvia. As a privately-funded small team, they have been able to produce a power delivery system far more advanced than any big manufacturer-supported program. When they contacted me to drive for them my first call was to my father, and he had nothing but positive things to say about team Drive eO.
J.ose458: What is racing without noise? With no ‘eargasms’?
RM: The biggest challenge racing an EV with this much power up the side of a mountain is visually determining speed perspective given there are no gear changes, RPM noise or vibration in the chassis. With the terminal speed of the car so high and very fast, knowing when to brake becomes an equal challenge.
yusufadams: How have you had to adapt your style of driving with this car, in comparison to the traditional fossil fuel driven vehicles you have piloted before?
RM: The biggest challenge I have driving this vehicle is harnessing 1400 ft/lbs of torque with my right foot, with no traction controls aids. The torque is instant and cannot be fed in slowly; it’s an eye-opening experience.
Considered Responses
The more I seem to learn about EVs, the more questions I have. Rhys has provided us with quite a unique insight here, from the perspective of the man responsible for mastering the art of racing an EV at one of the most difficult motorsport events in the world. It’s also an event that is very suited to developing an EV to defeat traditional internal combustion engines.
Could the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb, which celebrates its 100th year anniversary this weekend, become the turning point for the future of EV motorsport? If the ultimate goal is to win and be the fastest, then it’s looking increasingly likely that we need to take an electric future very seriously indeed.
Paddy McGrath
Instagram: pmcgphotos
Twitter: pmcgphotos
paddy@speedhunters.com
Photos by Louis Yio
Instagram: lusciousy
louis@speedhunters.com
OFFICIAL SPEEDHUNTERS SUPPLIERS
One question, does your car have a lot of torque? XD
Why does the interview end in a porn setting?
Well... someone is ripping the ring with the components. Limiting access to technology through exorbitant pricing. "Look at what we can do! But you can't have it."
You definitely can't say the future of pikes peak is EV just yet when the current combustion vs EV records are 50+ seconds in favour of the combustion engine. I do however think there will come a point when EV engines are comparible to combustion in racing but that will be atleast 10 years from now. Hybrids though... I think the chances of a hybrid car winning using similar technology to to F1 and Le Mans could be right around the corner.
johnbezt It has all of the torque. All of it.
SteveBeing Completely bespoke and cutting edge technology manufactured on a tiny scale is never going to be cheap.
Gary89 Millen won PPIHC last year outright in an EV, followed by Monster Tajima in another EV. I don't think it's that much of a leap to call electric the future of Pikes Pike. Loeb's record does still stand, for now, but that was an exceptional attempt with an incomparable budget. Time will tell.
I need an electric vehicle in my life
It's a question of applying technology.
If I was trying to climb a hill as quickly as possible, but my bhp was being sapped by the air pressure dropping it wouldn't take me long to start looking for a method of propulsion that needs as little air as possible.
After nuclear (and scrapping that idea after a shoot out in a car park with some Libyans...) electric would be the clear option.
I wouldn't try to go whaling in a dingy, I wouldn't try to catch a Greyhound on a pushbike...
(Holy crap! Electric drag! That would be hilariously scary fun!)
Some drivers seem to always throw high expectations all over themselves, and then suffer enormous pressure as a consequence. I much prefer the drivers who simply go as fast as they can go, and accept that it was their best.
The air is cleaner now than the industrial era... EV is cool but fossil fuels arent the problem that the left would have u believe.
You're mixing pollution and greenhouse gases, one causes people to die locally, the other affects the global environment.
If it wasn't a genuine problem I'm sure 'the left' would find a better way to spend the cash absorbed by environmental measures that has greater appeal to voters, like increased benefits or a decent minimum wage.
When I worked for Mercedes HPP (HPE in those days) if you offered a battery that cheap you'd lose a hand as we snatched it off you!
Thanks for asking my question, always interesting to learn more about this type of project!
Theres nothing exciting about electric vehicles. I like our machines to be complicated with a lot of moving parts. The test of man and machine includes the engine builder and his machines. The hot chips in my hair, in the pocket of my apron, and on the floor are part of achieving a worthy victory.
It was my pleasure to meet Rys a few years ago at a drift event in Atlanta. He is a hard working and very talented guy who is also very easy going and friendly.
I would like to ask Rys why he thinks an EV can compete with a gasoline powered car when gasoline has an energy density of 12,000 Wh/Kg and Li batteries have an energy density of only up to 265 Wh/Kg? We know electrics are very efficient ( not 100% as claimed by the article - no energy conversions are 100% efficient) - about 3 times better, but with a 45 fold advantage of gasoline with respect to potential energy on board, it is impossible for an EV to match the performance of an optimized IC car.
Note I said optimized, and Pikes Peak cars are far from optimized. Electric motors have some great characteristics, but the battery issue seems insurmountable with present technology. The bottom line being that the weight penalty will get you in the end. What is his take?
Also, how much does each of the motors weigh?
BTW - If going faster means a drastic change in sound, I would choose going faster.
To answer that, gas engine plus transmission plus differential plus drive shaft plus fuel tank plus turbo and turbo accessories weigh a fairly big portion including all the oils and fluids that would go into it radiators etc and it is very hard to optimize where those objects sit in a car vs a battery which can be easily at the lowest point of the car lowering its centre of gravity the motors would weigh a ton that is for sure but yet again they have a small footprint allowing them to be placed however they are needed which would probably be like a transmission in a traditional car. It may weigh a littlw more than its ice counterparts but weight distribution and crazy torque would turn that extra weight into a benefit, keeping the car more firmly planted/tame.
Eveee "weight distribution and crazy torque would turn that extra weight into a benefit, keeping the car more firmly planted/tame" - 1)Extra weight is never a benefit in racing. 2)It does not keep a car more firmly planted. On the contrary, it requires that extra downforce be used to achieve the same cornering Gs. The extra downforce has a weight, a drag and a horsepower penalty. An F1 car or a LeMans prototype has perfect weight distribution and low CG. I don't think the gains in getting the CG lower would make much of a cornering difference, or that it would be much lower as their crankshafts run about a half inch from the floor. The large batteries would also take up space used for undercar air management.
Keep in mind that power is what gets the car up the hill. Torque is just a force that need an RPM multiplier in the case of a motor or engine to give power at a given rpm. For instance you can sit your 200 pound ass on a 10 foot pullbar attached to a wheel hub and you have 2000 foot-pounds of torque at the wheel. You will not be powering the car up the hill too fast because you are not capable of applying that torque at a very high rpm. Some F1 cars had ~900hp with less than 350 foot-pounds of torque. On the newly paved Pikes Peak course, they would probably set a pretty good time, especially without the F1 aero limitations. The broad power band (due to high torqe at low rpm) of some electric motors is admittedly great, and that IMO is the main reason EV are competitive at all.
DeadSerious Ha ha! I get where you are coming from, but I bet driving this car would give you all the excitement you could handle.
JonathanW "If it wasn't a genuine problem I'm sure 'the left' would find a better way to spend the cash absorbed by environmental measures that has greater appeal to voters, like increased benefits or a decent minimum wage." As long as a "problem" gives them an excuse for collecting taxes and growing government to fix it, it will always be a problem, evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.
TarmacTerrorist Turbochargers were developed for aircraft in WW2 to allow the engines to make good power at altitude. They are still good for the same purpose. EVs are still at a disadvantage with weight to power. Battery or other energy storage solutions (hydrogen/electric of supercapacitor maybe) may change that in the future, but we are not close yet.
Gary89 Hybrid's racing advantage is due to energy recovered during braking. Going up a mountain does not require dissipating as much energy as running a road course. Now if it were a hill descent, my money would be on the hybrid! - lol
TarmacTerrorist I am not saying that you are incorrect about power loss at altitude, just that turbos can alleviate it to some degree.
Loebs car was still a car though, the silhouette of it is vastly different to the ev driven by Millen that resembles something closer to a F1 than a car. I'm not saying ev isn't the future, I just think it's going to take a good 10 years to catch up that 50+ sec to beat Millen.
There is still a huge amount of energy wasted when you consider the speed in which these front runners are hitting each corner. The best thing about the f1 and Le Mans hybrid systems is the weight gain is almost negligible and the system can be made to fit low to the ground and almost anywhere which in theory could be used to even aid handling and weight distribution. Using this style of hybrid has almost no down side, just free power to use as you please on the straights when the engine isn't performing as optimal due to atmosphere.
Really cool family! Good luck from Romania!
Hp=torque x rpm
Gary89 Loeb's car was exactly that though, a silhouette. It's a space frame chassis with a carbon body panels that just happen to look like an evolution of a 208. It's still awesome though.
P.S. The gap is down to 44s as of 2016, they broke the nine minute barrier yesterday.
Back to the future reference on point.
The problem is the weight isn't negligible, and the heavier you make your vehicle the bigger everything else becomes. F1 cars are 100kg heavier then they were 10 years ago, and back then they carried ballast, now the small teams barely carry any.
Personally I'd prefer to have seen the big push in the road car world go into light weight and more aerodynamic cars rather than hybrids... It's about fixing the problem, rather than the symptom. F1 could still bring lots to the party... Active aero etc would be very funky I think.
Except as soon as we figure out a better battery tech bye internal combustion
John Evans DeadSerious I would be all the excitement your mom could handle. The point is not that the once in a life time opportunity of driving a race car would be exciting as a driver. Thats not a debating me. Thats not even an argument. The point is, electric vehicle racing is a lesser sport. The biggest lie in the racing world is that tech developed in race cars makes its way to the street cars. Bull shit. Thats just marketing. The government will give breaks to manufacturers to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. The manufacturers will take the bait and lie to the consumers about saving the world from pollution because consumers dont research the impact battery pollution will cause. EV racing is all part of the electric vehicle lie. Ill get on board with EV the day an electric car wins Le Mans or Baja overall. Never mind Ill just rant about BOP at that point.
Paddy McGrath Gary89 people can argue all they want, in the end it goes down to how much power do you want, and how much weight penalty that power is going to give you. And in that regard, internal combustion engine is well ahead of EV
lets say you want a 2000hp car to climb pikes peak, you will end up with a much lighter car if you go IC engine, wich will result in a much faster car. This stands in 2016, who knows in the future
John Evans Gary89 That's actually not very relevant. That would be only relevant if you were limited on fuel (wich you aren't in this kind of events)
Plus, Batterys can't receive huge amounts of energy in a short period of time, that's why in F1 cars and LeMans Prototypes, only a marginal part of the braking goes to the batterys, most of it it's with normal disk breaking
Gary89 it's not like they weight is negligible, the thing is that they have a minimum weight to the chassis by the rules, so they can save weight in other components to make room to add the hybrid tech still being under the weight limits.
Eveee I see a lot of people talking about batterys like they are "underdeveloped" Batterys are as developed (if not more) than the ICE engine. You have been seeing them in all kinds of electronics, and the ones that go in cars are exactly the same, just biger
I disagree that there is nothing exciting about EVs - they offer huge potential to completely change the packaging of road cars as we are currently driven by the size and shape of a combustion engine and transmission of that power, so in future we could see cars that look very different and perform far better aerodynamically, so not a direct gain from EV but only achievable through EV.
Don't take my lack of reply as agreement, I just can't be bothered to debate something so political on a car website when neither of us will change the other's mind
Yea I know it's full space frame, what I mean to say is the aerodynamics of the car is still going to be worse than that electric car as it's silhouette is less aerodynamic and it's got weight higher in the chassi than that electric car. A full space frame chassi like that of a Le Mans lmp1 car and 1000+hp would be extremely formidable. But like you said only time will tell. Battery weight needs to get far lower.
I'm meaning more of a lite weight capacitor that stores charge and releases it further up the mountain when power loss is at its greatest. I don't think a well placed and low to the ground extra 80kg would affect breaking or handling all to much and the extra power you could get at crucial times would be beneficial. Alternatively a mis engine combustion car with electric engines up front to power the front tyres and make the car awd would also be good. Do extra driveshafts that steal power and add weight and you got all the upsides of instant torque and nil power loss combined with a fairly light chassi and high power combustion engine. Not unlike the new nsx.
Gary89 Those 80kg would be good for 150, 200hp? and for a limited time. If you "invest" those 80kg your engine (bigger motor or forced induction) you would see much greater gain in power that is working full time, wich to me seems more important.
80kg is a relevant amount of time penalty in racing, especially in cars sub 1000kg that are working under heavy downforce
JonathanW I never expect a lefty to agree, even if all the evidence in the world is presented. Socialism is a religious belief.
bakayaru It's the hotel in the local town near Pikes Peak that Rhys and his family have been staying at since he was young when his dad was competing in the hill climb so it has some sentimental value. The video interview was shot there for that reason.
Electric = Boring.
There's no argument here. Sure, they have instant torque, no power loss at altitude and I am sure they are fun to drive, but they just don't possess that sound or feel a combustion engine has. Whether it be high rpm, boost, anti-lag, exhaust or just the gearbox banging through the gears, it just isn't the same. If you think it is, you aren't a car lover.
Thommo If fun is had, why does it matter?
John Evans JonathanW
Politics on a car website is wrong. If you mix politics with car you, all you'll end up with is a shit cocktail.
The future of EV's in racing will expand with the addition of torque vectoring, like the Acura 4 motor concept. That and batteries with a higher power density.
Still, the third fastest time ever going up pike's peak is with an electric racecar.
That's why I backed out
...However I've got to step back in to revel in the irony of his 'evidence' comment (whilst sipping his delicious cocktail)
John,
Read this then don't reply:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm
Over and out.
JonathanW 1) You fall for the false narrative that global warming is bad and 2)
make the assumption that CO2 is the cause of warming 3) if there actually is
any - we really don't know for sure. There is increased greening of the planet.
This is not in question. NASA is attributing it to warming, but unbiased scientists
attribute it to the healthy increase in CO2 from .03 to .04 %. Keep in mind
that plant growth ceases at .02%
This new greening is scrubbing CO2 from the
atmosphere. If we suddenly slow our CO2 production, we may see a rebound lower
than .03% that may put humans at great risk of mass starvation. Do the
calculations for the caloric input of our energy use into the atmosphere and
you find that we should be warming the atmosphere at a much greater rate ~ 10x
what is assumed from CO2 IR absorption. We don't see it. Probably because we
radiate into space as a function of our temperature. We really don't have a
reliable way to tell how the earth's temperature is changing, but it can only
do 3 things; stay the same, go up or go down. Nothing in space stays the same
forever. Temps going up mean more food from increased plant growth. Temps going
down mean less food from decreased plan growth.
The 97% consensus claim is BS in the first place: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/16/top-mit-climate-scientist-trashes-97-consensus-claim/
People's opinions do not matter in science. Facts do.
Is it just me, or does any one else see the rise of EVs as the death of motorsport/car hobby?
Thommo I think steam engines are cool too. But for obvious reasons, they had to (mostly) go. We have all grown up with the "sound and feel" of combustion engines. But future generations won't, as EVs begin to take over. The car lover in me sees it as logical to accept the paradigm shift and find a new perspective about what's awesome. I also care about a sustainable future for humanity, where EVs are by far the most logical solution - so it's a no-brainer to me. I'll still love the sounds of an ICE, but as EVs get their own advantages, I try to also push my enthusiasm into that too.
JohnEvans2 JonathanW It's funny. The only reason that people are so "interested" in climate science, is because it has political consequences. Unfortunately, science in general has a strong communication problem, since the non-academic community don't really poses the skillset, knowledge or scientific skepticism to go through all the information themselves.
If you're truly interested in climate science, take a look at this lengthy course:
https://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x-1
Not only does it cover how climate change is real, serious and has an obvious human footprint. It also gives an in-depth description of how we know so, and even provides tools to check the data yourself.
~Best wishes
AskeBV JohnEvans2 JonathanW Climate change is real - never said it was not. Here is 4000 years worth of temp data. You can see it has been both significantly warmer in the past as well as cooler: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/4000-years-of-climate-in-one-chart.php
Your link starts with claims that I pointed out are BS - the 97% crap. It is simply not true.
"Unfortunately, science in general has a strong communication problem, since the non-academic community don't really poses the skillset, knowledge or scientific skepticism to go through all the information themselves." I am not in that group, but you certainly are. I am interested, and that is why I have studied it extensively. I am a scientist with a degree in chemistry and capable of understanding the science. Some of the so called scientists have pretty sketchy credentials.
As I pointed out, we do put heat into the atmosphere, but I made the point that CO2s radiative contribution was a small part of that heat, and our heat is probably not enough to drive climate. In addition I made the point that CO2 is causing a greening of the earth. The feedback from that greening will be lower temperatures and more scrubbing of CO2. Consider what we do in greenhouses to increase plant growth - we burn propane to give off CO2. I also pointed out that if CO2 falls below .02%, plant growth stops. That means no food.
If you want some insight to the political game that many of the scientists are playing, I suggest reading the leaked emails from E. Anglia and getting familiar with some of the lawsuits pertaining to climate science fraud. Best wishes to you too!
JohnEvans2 JonathanW I don't have a degree in climate science, no. But I have followed that course I linked, and have spoken to several climate scientists on the matter, and I am quite surprised if you're actually also a climate scientist and is being serious about the things you're saying. If you're just a chemist, and that makes you think you know climate science (because it obviously involves chemistry), then I'm not surprised, since that is also what I'm told is the norm: The further away your scientific subject is from climate science, the less they tend to agree with the consensus.
Since you allegedly have a degree, you also know, just as well as me, that linking to these articles is far from scientific accuracy. They often only represent one study, and often just an interpretation of it.
In the case of your two links, there's a strong misinterpretation, and both (among hundreds of other misconceptions or modifications) are covered in the course I linked above.
Long story short:
There's a wide range of big scientific organisations that agree on the notion that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities". And there's also a wide range of independent studies that all find a 90-100% consensus. John Cook is one of many. Others are Oreskes 2004, Doran 2009, Anderegg 2010, Verheggen 2014, Stenhouse 2014, Cariton 2015 etc. The major flaw with the 0.3% study you linked is that it includes studies that don't aim to take a stance on the matter. If you used the same method to find how many papers reject human-caused global warming, you'd find 0.08%
As for Andy May's 4000 year graph, it focuses strictly on regional warming (Greenland), not global warming, and the data he presents as present is actually 1855 (ice cores take a long time to form). The current global temperature is well above the warmest period in the last many thousand years.
But as I said, I'm not a climate scientist. So I don't think we should discuss stuff like this here. Go find real climate scientists instead. I just wrote this to spark your interest, since it sounds like it might be there.
AskeBV Thommo Steam never had the following that Electric or ICB had in the early years...so that's a bit of a strawman.
I'm no hater of electric powered cars. But the move toward it is purely emotional/political. They are not more efficient "fuel wise" nor are they cleaner (simply moving your emissions to a plant; nevermind the carbon emissions associated with building and transporting the components. I like the added variety EVs bring, but frankly there is a long way to go before they become the "future" of transportation.
Eveee Stop man, just stop. It's clear from your 1st reply, that you don't know what you are talking about.
AskeBV JohnEvans2 JonathanW look, I have no beef in the healthy debate you guys are having, but come on man, we know for a fact the earth was FAR warmer in the age of the Dinosaurs (Mesoziac Era) and has gone up and down regionally and globally - many times far hotter than whats being recorded now.
And guess what. none of those were caused by human activity. The Earth moved along with nary a hiccup. Even if the worse climate change predicted comes true; it will take decades if not centuries for it to happen. To those still alive when it is in full effect, it will seem normal and man would have long since adapted.
The science is not wrong. The conclusions and political fear mongering is.
dadecode AskeBV Thommo I neither like to reason by analogy, so my mention of the steam engine wasn't meant as an indirect argument that we have a similar situation now. Obviously it's very different.
And to the best of my knowledge, EVs are more efficient, especially in energy efficiency - but also in terms of emissions. An entirely coal-powered EV still emits less its lifecycle than ~25-30mpg cars, according to the most extensive sources I've found. But it is indeed a politically-influenced topic, so it can be hard to find the truth for non-experts like me.
There's no doubt however, that gasoline cars won't be the future. Inevitably, the vast majority of them will be gone. Oil won't last forever, no matter how many new reservoirs are found. Earth is a finite space, and all leading theories propose oil is formed millions of times slower than we currently consume it. Even if we found a way to make it artificially, it would probably be bound to be extremely inefficient to create, leaving its primary advantage to be its extreme energy density. So my logic dictates that while EVs might not be an overwhelming leap of technology, they are certainly the inevitable future. That there could be a "long way to go" until that inevitability, is less important to me.
And that's of course because of what some call politics. In my mind, however, it's just reason. I have looked thoroughly into climate science to make sure I had a scientific understanding of it (because I hate our natural tendency to be politically biased - it's one of the big preventers of human progress, in my mind). And to me, reason dictates that even if it turns out that all the climate scientists are wrong, and humans are not making a significant contribution to climate change - why take the chance? We know we have to change away from finite resources eventually. And given the risks that the climate scientists propose, it seems very illogical to ignore those risks. Fortunately, most of humanity doesn't.
dadecode AskeBV JohnEvans2 JonathanW The worst risks are not the direct changes for humans. Higher oceans, more intense weather etc. are obviously not something humans couldn't adapt to. We can just build higher up, and build more environment resistant buildings. And we have already begun doing that.
The main problem is the consequences to the many other species that inhabit this planet, of which we indirectly depend on. We are not out of the food chain, even though we like to think we are. And many of those species are far less adaptable. So the biggest risk, to my humble understanding, is of an inability to feed ourselves. Moreover, it's also the increasingly unpredictable nature of the future, when it's changing more rapidly than ever before.
Regardless, I see it as a question of willingness to take risks.
I hate the political bias, in science, as much as the next guy. From time to time, I'm pretty frustrated by it actually. But I'm neither enthusiastic about carrying on with practices which are comfortable to us, but risky to future generations. I don't enjoy the thought of being apart of generations who could have done something, but didn't. And not out of ignorance, which would be fine - but if it's out of stubbornness and political dispute, then I'm not okay with it.
Needless to say, I dislike the phrase "fear mongering", since it seems to be nothing but an outright attempt to invalidate or belittle concerns - be it true or false concerns. It's shallow talk that I think should be kept in unserious topics - like reality shows, drama porn or modern populism
I like the idea of a future where we can power our cars and homes with electricity generated from wind/solar sources, as it's just good engineering. If you can do something efficiently, why would you not?
LouisYio Thommo As I said, i'm sure they fun to drive, but as a spectator? no thanks...
JonathanW Peripheral ported Quad Rotor...
with a very nice speed sure the car could be a champion onehttp://dokterpoker.org
the car was very good
really really like to see the car that shiny new car fits like made for walking trailsthe car was very good http://utamadomino.com/app/img/peraturan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://utamadomino.com/app/img/peraturan.html and very fast http://utamadomino.com/app/img/jadwal.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://utamadomino.com/app/img/jadwal.html mix of colors http://utamadomino.com/app/img/promo.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://utamadomino.com/app/img/promo.html from which to http://utamadomino.com/app/img/panduan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://utamadomino.com/app/img/panduan.html make want pobud http://utamadomino.com/ see hatnya http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/peraturan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/peraturan.html kecepatanya http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/jadwal.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/jadwal.html was very nice ,http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/promo.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/promo.html suitable for a "http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/panduan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/panduan.html sharp bend http://dokterpoker.org or not sharp I guess motorists http://633cash.com/Games like this is http://633cash.com/Pengaturan" very skilled in the speed I hope I can membilinya someday will whether http://633cash.com/Daftar http://633cash.com/Promo there are http://633cash.com/Berita new cars http://633cash.com/Livescore are better I http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/peraturan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/peraturan.html 'll wait for it , with a stylish car classic http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/jadwal.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/jadwal.html style I http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/promo.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/promo.html also like http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/panduan.html" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/panduan.html to see would be http://raksasapoker.com/ whether there is a http://yakuza4d.com/peraturan" rel="dofollow" target="_blank">http://yakuza4d.com/peraturan car that is http://yakuza4d.com as fast and forius http://yakuza4d.com/home like in the "http://yakuza4d.com/daftar movie , the car very http://yakuza4d.com/cara_main good car http://yakuza4d.com/hasil designed a way apparently hopefully http://yakuza4d.com/buku_mimpi there will be new cars more good and the price is quite pantastis then chances are I can membilinya the same as you have at this time