Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

timharford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 291 posts

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#101

Post by usefulcat »

chrisseaton wrote: post #53
tw04 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal. The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes aren't interested in something with the performance of a geo metro. So, while on paper a PHEV solution might look better, in the real world it would result in those people just goin…

> The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal. The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes aren't interested in something with the performance of a geo metro. How many people take their cars to race tracks to be able to tell the difference in performance? If it can get to 70 mph in some reasonable time, which almost any production car can, then what more is there to ask…

I guess that’s a rhetorical question? Because clearly many people do actually prefer a BMW to a geo metro, despite the price difference.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#102

Post by DenseComet »

olivermarks wrote: post #97
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #65

This kind of strategy ignores second order effects. For example, by buying a gas guzzler and not using it much you might lower the emissions from that specific vehicle. But supply and demand rears its ugly head: you're contributing to the increase of similar gas guzzlers' value in the market, which means that other people are more likely to maintain those vehicles in working order and resell them, instead of scrappin…

We need to get used to using the term 'power consumer' instead of emotive terms like 'gas guzzler' to describe IC engines. Currently coal powered BEVs are considered by some to have superior efficiencies to gasoline powered vehicles.

I would expect that to be true. Not the best numbers, but Wikipedia puts coal power plants at 37% efficiency and combustion engines at 20-35%. This makes sense too, power plants have space, money, and an incentive to increase efficiency. And in reality, no power mix is 100% coal, increasing the overall efficiency to above 37%.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#103

Post by natch »

willcipriano wrote: post #66
gpm wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plug in electric hybrids strike me as insanely complex machines compared to Ev's. It strikes me as highly unlikely that from an environmental standpoint our (societies) time is better spent building them, than it is spent increasing the rate at which we can build batteries.

I'd expect EVs to be cheaper if they are actually simpler, last time I looked that wasn't really the case outside of cars produced in China that most western customers wouldn't buy.

You can get a Bolt for around $11k after incentives. OK the incentives part is a wrench in the equation to be sure, so it may be hard to answer my question…

Are you saying hybrids cost less than that?

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#104

Post by betwixthewires »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #65

This kind of strategy ignores second order effects. For example, by buying a gas guzzler and not using it much you might lower the emissions from that specific vehicle. But supply and demand rears its ugly head: you're contributing to the increase of similar gas guzzlers' value in the market, which means that other people are more likely to maintain those vehicles in working order and resell them, instead of scrappin…

Look at the other side of this: by buying an EV, you're increasing the demand and increasing the cost barrier to owning one, so people are more likely to buy a cheaper, gas car. An EV you're not going to use much that sits in your garage is one less on the market to drive the supply up.

Generally, the idea that people toss their cars in the garbage is wrong. They enter the secondary market and someone drives them either way. Scrapping them only happens when their useful lifespan is over.

Buying a newly made gas guzzler is a different story.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#105

Post by afbadfatdh »

tw04 wrote: post #45
FriedPickles wrote: post #38

To further develop the idea of letting EVs go to people who will drive them the most, the true bottleneck is batteries . So, the problem is to get batteries on the road in a way that they will displace the most gas miles as soon as possible. This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), then in a second stage, replace those with full EVs. For most city vehicles…

>This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal. The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes aren't interested in something with the performance of a geo metro. So, while on paper a PHEV solution might look better, in the real world it would result in those people just goin…

>The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal.

The Chevy Volt was pretty sporty (damn the suits who killed it), and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI-DUULV1tE

>The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes

Well there's your problem. The fact that EVs are toys is making you think PHEVs are also toys. There are PHEVs currently on the market that can compete with the Ford Focus and the Honda Accord.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#106

Post by saalweachter »

wlesieutre wrote: post #70
hannob wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For most city vehicles, a PHEV will electrify the majority of the miles with a fraction of the battery capacity. There have been studies on how PHEVs are used in the real world and this is just not what's happening, see e.g.: https://theicct.org/publications/phev-real-world-usage-sept2...

> For private cars, the average utility factor (UF)—the portion of kilometers driven on electric motor versus kilometers driven on combustion engine—is 69% for NEDC type approval but only around 37% for real-world driving Not a majority, but 37% of your driving on electric is a significant chunk. Would And to take a Prius Prime for an example, you can still have a very efficient vehicle when you're running in normal…

You can also fully charge a 10kWh battery overnight on a 120V charger.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#107

Post by Sporktacular »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #65

This kind of strategy ignores second order effects. For example, by buying a gas guzzler and not using it much you might lower the emissions from that specific vehicle. But supply and demand rears its ugly head: you're contributing to the increase of similar gas guzzlers' value in the market, which means that other people are more likely to maintain those vehicles in working order and resell them, instead of scrappin…

Exactly, it induces demand. Same went for efforts to reintroduce ivory in a more ethically sourced way back onto the market. Demand exploded and kick started poaching again. There are other examples too.

As for buying coalmines, typically mining rights are sold to miners as licenses that owners expect to get a percentage from. When the buyer turns out to be an environmental NGO the license gets revoked pretty quickly. This happened in the US earlier this year. These strategies will often run into implementation complexities.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#108

Post by gabesullice »

A different way to get to the same result as a minimum fuel requirement would be to raise base prices and offer steep bulk discounts. This would be easier to enforce than a minimum fuel requirement. Unfortunately it might raise "price gouging" complaints.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#109

Post by horsawlarway »

boffinism wrote: post #22
barbazoo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, I don't get how that would increase throughput.

It's not about increasing throughout, it's about increasing user satisfaction. A system where 60 customers are served an hour, and none of them has queued, is theoretically better than one where the same amount are served, but each has queued for 10 boring minutes. You achieve this by disincentivising queueing.

Those who really want your product now have to mob up outside your stall and hope they're the next lucky random fucker. They're still waiting.

Those who don't really want your product don't wait in a line for it anyways - the length of the line itself is a natural filter for availability of the good.

Basically - has satisfaction actually gone up if those who would be extremely satisfied by your product no longer receive it, and random folks who may or may not want your product do? I'd bet money the answer is a solid "NO".

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#110

Post by Armisael16 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #53
tw04 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal. The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes aren't interested in something with the performance of a geo metro. So, while on paper a PHEV solution might look better, in the real world it would result in those people just goin…

> The performance of pretty much every PHEV I've seen is abysmal. The people buying a Model 3 or Model S to replace their BMW or Mercedes aren't interested in something with the performance of a geo metro. How many people take their cars to race tracks to be able to tell the difference in performance? If it can get to 70 mph in some reasonable time, which almost any production car can, then what more is there to ask…

There’s an extremely obvious difference in 0-60 times between a Prius and a Model 3, and that matters on an on-ramp. (Replace 0-60 with 5-60 or 25-60 or whatever you measure of acceleration you prefer).

Is it necessary? No, obviously, people aren’t dying left and right trying to merge in Priuses. It is very noticeable, however.

Post reply on HN