Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.

Is this true or did you just make it up?

The top of the line Lucid EV will have a 113kWh battery pack. There are not any 30kWh battery pack Teslas remaining on the road. I am not as familiar with the Leaf specs, but if I were to guess I would believe that the Leaf capacities must be around 60kWh by now, so about half of the Lucid's.

I am all about being clear about environmental arguments if you are making a green argument with EV's but you have to base your argument in reality and not just make up sound bite data which you treat as fact.

Lucid seems like an interesting vehicle. I am all about competition in this field. Whatever spurs Tesla and the Legacy manufacturers to evolve is great. The market can handle another player.

Electricity isn’t just about storage capacity- it’s about the amount of watt/hr per unit of work done. There is no massaging the numbers to try and make this thing look anything but what it is. A wasteful, massively inefficient toy for rich people.

Wow, you are in over your head talking about things you have no idea about. No problem, that is what DCUM is all about, but people should know that your data and math is completely inaccurate.

I am not a big believer in EV are clean, I drive one because it is simply a better car than any ICE, but your statements in this thread are baseless.

Show me - with data - where “I’m over my head”, please. Give me specifics with regards to power consumption and unit of work per watt. Your feelz don’t cut it. Show us the numbers.

This is a standard DCUM tactic. You throw out spurious 'data' and then argue to defend it claiming I need to show you data.

Dude, you cannot back up your assertions that the Lucid requires as much electricity as 4 Tesla's or a dozen Leaf's. You made that up because it sounded good. Again, I am not going to die on the hill defending EV's, but I will say that we should be able to have a data and reason based conversation. Just help us bring the conversation into reality and maybe a potential consumer will be educated and not simply sound bited.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.

Is this true or did you just make it up?

The top of the line Lucid EV will have a 113kWh battery pack. There are not any 30kWh battery pack Teslas remaining on the road. I am not as familiar with the Leaf specs, but if I were to guess I would believe that the Leaf capacities must be around 60kWh by now, so about half of the Lucid's.

I am all about being clear about environmental arguments if you are making a green argument with EV's but you have to base your argument in reality and not just make up sound bite data which you treat as fact.

Lucid seems like an interesting vehicle. I am all about competition in this field. Whatever spurs Tesla and the Legacy manufacturers to evolve is great. The market can handle another player.

Electricity isn’t just about storage capacity- it’s about the amount of watt/hr per unit of work done. There is no massaging the numbers to try and make this thing look anything but what it is. A wasteful, massively inefficient toy for rich people.

Wow, you are in over your head talking about things you have no idea about. No problem, that is what DCUM is all about, but people should know that your data and math is completely inaccurate.

I am not a big believer in EV are clean, I drive one because it is simply a better car than any ICE, but your statements in this thread are baseless.

Show me - with data - where “I’m over my head”, please. Give me specifics with regards to power consumption and unit of work per watt. Your feelz don’t cut it. Show us the numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.

Is this true or did you just make it up?

The top of the line Lucid EV will have a 113kWh battery pack. There are not any 30kWh battery pack Teslas remaining on the road. I am not as familiar with the Leaf specs, but if I were to guess I would believe that the Leaf capacities must be around 60kWh by now, so about half of the Lucid's.

I am all about being clear about environmental arguments if you are making a green argument with EV's but you have to base your argument in reality and not just make up sound bite data which you treat as fact.

Lucid seems like an interesting vehicle. I am all about competition in this field. Whatever spurs Tesla and the Legacy manufacturers to evolve is great. The market can handle another player.

Electricity isn’t just about storage capacity- it’s about the amount of watt/hr per unit of work done. There is no massaging the numbers to try and make this thing look anything but what it is. A wasteful, massively inefficient toy for rich people.

Wow, you are in over your head talking about things you have no idea about. No problem, that is what DCUM is all about, but people should know that your data and math is completely inaccurate.

I am not a big believer in EV are clean, I drive one because it is simply a better car than any ICE, but your statements in this thread are baseless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.

Is this true or did you just make it up?

The top of the line Lucid EV will have a 113kWh battery pack. There are not any 30kWh battery pack Teslas remaining on the road. I am not as familiar with the Leaf specs, but if I were to guess I would believe that the Leaf capacities must be around 60kWh by now, so about half of the Lucid's.

I am all about being clear about environmental arguments if you are making a green argument with EV's but you have to base your argument in reality and not just make up sound bite data which you treat as fact.

Lucid seems like an interesting vehicle. I am all about competition in this field. Whatever spurs Tesla and the Legacy manufacturers to evolve is great. The market can handle another player.

Electricity isn’t just about storage capacity- it’s about the amount of watt/hr per unit of work done. There is no massaging the numbers to try and make this thing look anything but what it is. A wasteful, massively inefficient toy for rich people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you need/want 1000 HP for? Sounds good for destroying things/myself.

Why does anyone need a porsche, lambo, or ferrari, or 7 series while we are at it?

They don’t.

If people can tell me “you don’t need an AR15”, then I can tell them “they don’t need a sports car”.

If we’re headed for a world where I get to tell you what I think you need or not, it’s going to get real ugly. Because most of you won’t like the choices I’m going to be imposing on you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you need/want 1000 HP for? Sounds good for destroying things/myself.

Why does anyone need a porsche, lambo, or ferrari, or 7 series while we are at it?

Anonymous wrote:What do you need/want 1000 HP for? Sounds good for destroying things/myself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.

Is this true or did you just make it up?

The top of the line Lucid EV will have a 113kWh battery pack. There are not any 30kWh battery pack Teslas remaining on the road. I am not as familiar with the Leaf specs, but if I were to guess I would believe that the Leaf capacities must be around 60kWh by now, so about half of the Lucid's.

I am all about being clear about environmental arguments if you are making a green argument with EV's but you have to base your argument in reality and not just make up sound bite data which you treat as fact.

Lucid seems like an interesting vehicle. I am all about competition in this field. Whatever spurs Tesla and the Legacy manufacturers to evolve is great. The market can handle another player.

Anonymous wrote:It’s just the EV equivalent of a gas-guzzling SUV.

It requires a much electricity to charge its batteries as would be needed by 4 Tesla’s or a dozen Nissan Leaf’s.

All that electricity going into ONE vehicle is electricity that can’t be used in other things - meaning that even more carbon must be put into the air to make more electricity for the other things that need it (70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuel).

There is absolutely NOTHING green about vehicles like this.