Ford isn’t giving up on electric trucks. It expects to sell the EV Fathom for less than $30,000 next year, and that EV platform is intended to be the foundation of a wide variety of models, with lessons learned from the F-150 Lightning and the Mustang Mach E. One big one they’ve talked about is the advantages of designing an EV from the ground up with no intention of sharing a platform with an ICE powertrain, and minimizing weight from wiring and harnesses following inefficient paths.

Continuing to drive our vehicles for 7 cents per mile.

Part of it is the sheer diversity of options and trim levels that are all under the same make and model of the Ford F-150. Taking a look at the Ford F-150 trim levels, there are basically 4 gasoline engines, 2 flex fuel engines, 1 hybrid drivetrain, 1 diesel engine, and a now discontinued EV powertrain. There are about 5 body/cab options, and several suspension options.

In contrast, take, for example, the GM BEV3 platform. It’s the Chevy Equinox, Chevy Blazer, Cadillac Lyriq, Cadillac Optiq, Honda Prologue, and Acura ZDX. I’ve driven several of these and they’re all basically the same with different options. There’s less diversity in those models than there is for the Ford F-150.

I think it’s interesting that at large scales, when talking about land use, agriculture, flood risk, etc., the standard unit of measure for water volume in the U.S. is acre-foot.

The University of York compared panels capable of 1.5 kW and found that vertically mounted bifacial panels generally outperformed tilt mounted monofacial panels, by between 14-27% on a monthly basis, at least when surrounded by gravel, in the climate/altitude of that particular location.

The reason given is that vertically mounted systems capture a lot more indirect reflected sunlight from the surroundings, across a wider range of conditions.

I wonder if there’s an easy way to test them, other than actually driving out and trying it somewhere.

A lot of the grid power still based on fossil fuels or coal

Even if you of a long tailpipe emissions analysis of pure coal power, the total emissions are still lower than a comparable gasoline powered engine.

Coal emits about 2.31 lbs (1.05 kg) of carbon dioxide per kwh.

Gasoline emits about 20 lbs (8.9 kg) of carbon dioxide per gallon burned.

So a car that gets 3.5 miles per kWh and is purely charged on coal emits about 0.3 kg of carbon per mile. A car that runs on gasoline and gets 30 miles per gallon is about the same.

In comparison, natural gas is about 0.96lbs of CO2 per kWh, so that EV charged on natural gas would emit roughly the same as a 74 mile per gallon vehicle.

Note that currently, in the US, coal is about 16% of electricity production, and natural gas is 41%. If you compare the emissions to the overall mix, you’ll get even lower numbers for the EV emissions.

Which adapter do you have?

Exactly. Engine displacement is just one number, and there have been major paradigm shifts in designs to squeeze way better performance and efficiency out of those engines across a wide range of RPMs: switching from carburetors to fuel injection, developing variable valve timing, better transmissions/traction control systems for actually get that torque and power on the ground.

Plus, like, the rise of EVs, or even performance hybrids, has shown that you can have ultra high performance without any displacement at all.

Looking back at the muscle cars of the 1970’s, where the idea came from, it’s crazy how huge those engines were, compared to 0-60 and quarter mile times that just weren’t that impressive by the 90’s, much less today. The 1970 Chevelle SS 454 had a 7.4L engine at 450 hp, but only got a 5.4s 0-62 and a 13.8s quarter mile. In 1995, the Toyota Supra put up similar performance with a 3.0L, 280 HP engine (although back then the Japanese manufacturers had some kind of gentleman’s agreement not to exceed 280hp in a way that tended to understate their overall performance). Today, Tesla literally manufactures a family friendly 3-row SUV that blows those numbers away. Scrolling through a list of cars that have sub-10 second quarter mile times off the factory floor, most of them have at least hybrid drivetrains where electric motors boost the overall torque and power.

Relying on displacement these days is just giving up.