Does the current spike in fuel prices increase the appeal of the Slate?

[Tom Sawyer]

In fact, there was a short period of time when oil was being traded for BELOW $0/bbl.

When did this happen? I should have bought some!

 

[CorvusCorvax]

When did this happen? I should have bought some!

Very brief dip in price in 2020, as I recall - it wasn't very long, but notable because it had never happened before.

 

[CorvusCorvax]

I'm looking for something related to the Slate truck in this discussion but can't seem to find it... 🤔

Well, it is out of context, but it relates to the subject matter of the thread.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Very brief dip in price in 2020, as I recall - it wasn't very long, but notable because it had never happened before.

If you could provide a link to this, that'd be great.

 

[CorvusCorvax]

But your statement was obvious and not new, regardless.

And yet you still didn't grasp it, and now want to be some kind of tone police. Cool.

Your talking point, about EVs being forced on us (no force was used to make a simple person buy one) is false. Full stop. No force is being used. The absence of all other choices doesn't imply force, it may just mean that the other possibilities won't make shareholder profit. Why don't we have flying cars? The technology exists, and yet they never seem to come to market. Maybe because of regulatory and safety concerns? Are we being forced to remain earthbound in our cars? Hint: general aviation exists. And it is expensive, and the rules are manifold. So, the *choice* is terrestrial-based transportation for most. EV manufacture is also a choice. A choice where for-profit companies like Slate try to make a buck on vehicles that don't require gasoline or diesel as a power source. Electricity is widely available, and relatively cheap. The use of electricity to power things is generally more energy-efficient than by ICE engines. When it comes down to it, the only thing holding back electric vehicles is storage. Petrochemical fuel is very energy-dense, and batteries are really not.

Think of it - everywhere, people could harvest their own electricity, store it in highly-efficient batteries, then transfer it to their vehicles overnight. That means that on daily basis, your auto fuel is free. Yes, it's not, because you had to purchase some infrastructure. What then would happen, if a very large number of people did this, to the price of a barrel of oil? Electricity is a very democratic energy source. Each person can essentially make it themselves, unlike pretty much any other fuel type. And for those who can't, it already comes to their home, at VERY low prices per unit of work performed. SO, this idea that EVs were "forced" on us is a talking point often-repeated by those who have a stake in either oil production, or those who benefit from those in oil production, and the lackeys of those two groups. This talking point has been out there for years.

Yes, the current spike in fuel prices can be traced to a single decision. These prices were literally forced on us, and they will affect automobile production decisions, because they will affect automobile buying decisions. There is zero guarantee that they current pricing is temporarily up - it *could* get higher. It could remain that way. To say otherwise is to parrot talking points that have been circulating among the talking heads for a month or more.

 

[CorvusCorvax]

If you could provide a link to this, that'd be great.

Since it took me all of 15 seconds with Google, I'll give you a date:

4/20/2020 (they must have been smoking something, right?)

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Since it took me all of 15 seconds with Google, I'll give you a date:

4/20/2020 (they must have been smoking something, right?)

But do you have a LINK to the FACTS that back up YOUR claim?

 

[CorvusCorvax]

But do you have a LINK to the FACTS that back up YOUR claim?

Yes. BTW, it's not a claim, it's a hard fact. Sealioning is never a good look, BTW.

Something that is easily verified by using Google for 15 seconds is not something I'll be sealioned into. If you're curious, go look it up. If you're just playing internet games, well, good luck with that.

 

[Garbone]

My company paid $125 to fill up my work vehicle today. That amount keeps my family rolling in 2 MachE for 2 months and we average about 1000 miles per month per vehicle.

I have also been following Used F150 Lightning prices. They have also gone up at least $3000 on average with fewer available since the fuel price bump. I should have got that one for $25k a few weeks back, now you can not find anything decent under $30k.

 

[GaRailroader]

https://www.google.com/search?q=was...S&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#lfId=ChxjMe

 

[E90400K]

And yet you still didn't grasp it, and now want to be some kind of tone police. Cool.

Your talking point, about EVs being forced on us (no force was used to make a simple person buy one) is false. Full stop. No force is being used. The absence of all other choices doesn't imply force, it may just mean that the other possibilities won't make shareholder profit. Why don't we have flying cars? The technology exists, and yet they never seem to come to market. Maybe because of regulatory and safety concerns? Are we being forced to remain earthbound in our cars? Hint: general aviation exists. And it is expensive, and the rules are manifold. So, the *choice* is terrestrial-based transportation for most. EV manufacture is also a choice. A choice where for-profit companies like Slate try to make a buck on vehicles that don't require gasoline or diesel as a power source. Electricity is widely available, and relatively cheap. The use of electricity to power things is generally more energy-efficient than by ICE engines. When it comes down to it, the only thing holding back electric vehicles is storage. Petrochemical fuel is very energy-dense, and batteries are really not.

Think of it - everywhere, people could harvest their own electricity, store it in highly-efficient batteries, then transfer it to their vehicles overnight. That means that on daily basis, your auto fuel is free. Yes, it's not, because you had to purchase some infrastructure. What then would happen, if a very large number of people did this, to the price of a barrel of oil? Electricity is a very democratic energy source. Each person can essentially make it themselves, unlike pretty much any other fuel type. And for those who can't, it already comes to their home, at VERY low prices per unit of work performed. SO, this idea that EVs were "forced" on us is a talking point often-repeated by those who have a stake in either oil production, or those who benefit from those in oil production, and the lackeys of those two groups. This talking point has been out there for years.

Yes, the current spike in fuel prices can be traced to a single decision. These prices were literally forced on us, and they will affect automobile production decisions, because they will affect automobile buying decisions. There is zero guarantee that they current pricing is temporarily up - it *could* get higher. It could remain that way. To say otherwise is to parrot talking points that have been circulating among the talking heads for a month or more.

You can drop the condescending attitude; you're not smarter than anyone else nor more enlightened. But to reiterate, I never said my (politically-based) argument was about forcing EV on Americans. I said an argument can be made that the EV decision was made for us.

 

[IamSpotted]

If gas is going the way it is, I'll be on board for the slate 100%. If gas stays between 4.50 and 5.00/gallon, im looking at over 4k in gas alone for my current car for the year. With our electric rate where I live and the same amount of driving, I would be looking at around 1300-1700 for the first year (including cost of a level 2 charger). Subsequent years would be around 300-500 per year charging mostly at home where the cost per kWh is $0.0912 as of last month. Factory in things like reduced maintenance and the truck will pay for itself pretty quickly.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes. BTW, it's not a claim, it's a hard fact. Sealioning is never a good look, BTW.

Something that is easily verified by using Google for 15 seconds is not something I'll be sealioned into. If you're curious, go look it up. If you're just playing internet games, well, good luck with that.

Hey, no worries good man! It’s not my claim.

I figured that since you’re so focused on facts here that you might provide some basis instead of Yosemite Sam rhetoric.

 

[bloo]

You can drop the condescending attitude; you not smarter than anyone else nor more enlightened. But to reiterate, I never said my (politically-based) argument was about forcing EV on Americans. I said an argument can be made that the EV decision (was made for us.

[emphasis mine)

And that's what you're missing. There's no argument to be made about government "forcing" EVs on anyone. It simply hasn't happened. Your choice of weasel words in the sentence I bolded bears that out.

Contrast that with my direct statements: high fuel prices have been forced on us, high fuel prices are hurting us, "temporary" high fuel prices have permanent effects. I don't need to weasel in vague "an argument can be made" qualifier. That's coz there's nothing to argue about.

People around the world are suffering for a choice they had no part in making. Some of them are family and friends. They didn't ask for this.

My US customers didn't ask for it, either. A lot of them are startups in the industrial BEV space. More than a year of EV hate plus one foolish decision is killing them. If too many of them go, so does my job.

 

[Imhotep]

Has anyone heard from @AZFox ?