, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As regular readers know, I’ve been debunking Electric vehicle cheerleaders for years.  My primary principle in this area is simple: government has no business using taxpayer money to pick winners and losers in the marketplace.  When the Chevy Volt was all the rage during the Age of Obama, the “Lightworker” visited a Volt plant for a photo op and proclaimed his desire to buy one as soon as he left the White House.  I predicted two things: (1) because it was losing truckloads of money on every Volt it built, when Obama left the White House, GM would wait a decent interval and cease Volt production, and (2) Barack Obama would never buy a Volt.

You’ll never guess what happened, gentle readers!  OK, you guessed: GM ceased Volt production in March of 2019 and Barack Obama never bought one.  Of course we’ve known since a few days after the dawn of the Age of Obama all his promises have expiration dates.

For the moment, GM only produces the diminutive Bolt—go here to see how they’re on fire–and I don’t mean sales, and the Hummer EV.  I wrote about that one in Your Biden EV Future, where I wrote this:

Only $112,595?  Why, Joe Normal American will buy seven, one for each day of the week, and change them like underwear.  That way he can be pretty sure he’ll always have one charged up.  Maybe after he spends another $2000 or so for a home fast charger, then there’s installation…

That’s right, gentle readers, the Hummer EV will retail for only $112,595!  What Normal American wouldn’t immediately rush to the nearest GM dealer to snap up at least two of those? I ended that article thus:

D/S/Cs are, you see gentle readers, The Party of Science.  The problem is, they’re going to mandate virtue first, and if the science doesn’t actually exist to make their virtue reality, that’s too damned bad for Deplorables–and the economy–and the country–and the world.  You don’t really think they’re going to limit themselves to EVs, do you?  They’re going to be very busy saving the planet on our behalf, so what’s a little inconvenience to Deplorables?  As Barack Obama used to say, we ought to be thanking them.

It’s not nearly enough, no, for Biden—actually his puppeteers—to mandate we peasants drive EVS by a date certain.  Now he’s mandating it for our military, and GM is responding:

The Hummer H1 was based on a military truck, and now it appears GM is ready to return the favor. GM Defense president Steve duMont told CNBC the company planned to build a military vehicle prototype based on the upcoming Hummer EV. The eLRV, or electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle, would modify the Hummer’s frame, motors and Ultium batteries to suit US military requirements.

And what, pray tell, might an Ultium battery be?

The success of an electric car frequently revolves around its batteries, and GM is determined to have some of the best. It just revealed new Ultium batteries that it claims will deliver the range and performance to make EVs practical for ‘nearly every customer.’ Their pouch-like cells can be stacked both horizontally and vertically, allowing GM to cram more storage into a given space and accommodate a wide range of vehicles. The batteries can range from 50kWh to 200kWh, or enough to deliver as much as 400 miles of range and 0-60MPH in 3 seconds — conveniently, the same acceleration as the upcoming Hummer EV.

Ultium batteries will normally support up to 200kW fast charging (slower than Tesla’s 250kW Supercharger V3, if still quick), but there will be 800-volt packs for trucks that will handle 350kW charging. They’ll be low-cobalt designs that are both cheaper than before (under $100 per kWh) and should raise fewer concerns about the labor required. Between the lower costs of the batteries themselves, the reuse of existing facilities and simpler car designs, GM expects its next wave of EVs to be ‘profitable’ — it’ll have an incentive to sell them like any other car.

Note the cheerleading last sentence, which admits GM’s EVs have not, to this point, been profitable.  In other words, GM shareholders have been left holding the bag on every EV GM has manufactured, as have US taxpayers in the form of tax incentives for the top 7% of the population, which is that part that has actually been buying EVs.

What is GM going to do?  Reduce the purchase price of an EV from more than $112 thousand dollars to say, $90 thousand?  Sign me up for at least three of those!

We should also note the “as much as 400 miles of range,” teaser.  Beginning with the Volt, GM’s range figures have been taken not with a grain, but a block of salt.  Real world mileage has consistently been about half of the quoted mileage, which might be obtainable under absolutely ideal climate and road conditions, with absolutely no electric power drawing accessories–like radio, lights, heater, AC–activated, carrying nothing more than a driver with very old lady-like driving habits.  In the real world, those kinds of range figures have been revealed to be unicorn farts and fairy dust.  But let’s get back to EVs for our military:

The prototype should be ready sometime in 2022. There’s no guarantee American armed forces will use the eLRV, however. The Army is still exploring the viability of EVs like this, and GM will have to meet formal requirements (along with a rival manufacturer) if and when they exist. A choice is due sometime in the mid-2020s.

I’m sure a military far more concerned about CRT and LGBTQWERTY indoctrination than operational effectiveness—and the lives of its troops–will be more than happy to go electric.  This is particularly bubble-headed cheerleading:

EVs generally require less maintenance due to fewer moving parts. And their quiet operation could be extremely useful for recon and stealth missions where conventional rides would be too noisy. The challenge is to make the most of these advantages while minimizing drawbacks that could hurt operational speeds.

Where to begin?  Let’s start with the batteries.  Contemporary battery technology requires volatile chemicals that must be kept separated.  Even a pinhole is enough to spark spontaneous, and often explosive, combustion.  Military vehicles have to be extraordinarily rugged; they’re not going to be driven on highways, and filling-rattling jolts are the norm rather than the exception.  There are no known batteries of sufficient robustness for military applications.

The kind of quietness cited is illusory.  Reconnaissance missions work because troops can keep at a safe distance from the enemy, yet still detect them, a mission currently being increasingly done with small, stealthy flying drones.  Such missions are not dependent on silent vehicles.  That kind of recon requires highly trained, stealthy warriors on foot, not vehicles that can’t get nearly that close without being seen, regardless of their power source.

Military vehicles are also prone to be hit with projectiles of all kinds.  Even a pistol round or bit of shrapnel in the battery pack would be sufficient to destroy the entire vehicle, again, potentially beginning with a fiery explosion. Adding armor for a battery pack increases weight, which decreases range. It takes little imagination to envision what would happen to an EV hit with any kind of explosive round.  “Secondary explosion” might be inadequate to explain.  Certainly, gas or diesel powered vehicles can catch fire when hit by hostile fire, but not by design.

Good question

And how, pray tell, would a military EV recharge in the field?  Let’s say manufacturers develop ultra, mega, super-duper, Omicron fast chargers that can recharge a battery pack to 80% in 30 minutes.  That means a vehicle sitting in one spot for at least that long—assuming a charging vehicle with generator can get there–greatly increasing its sitting duck target time. Actually, the sitting duck charging time of the vehicle to be charged, the generator, and the vehicle towing it.  And what, pray tell, will be charging this EV?  Why, a diesel powered generator towed by another electric EV?  An EV that will require the charger it tows to charge it?  The generator, chugging merrily along, producing vast amounts of heat, will also be a prime target for the enemy’s thermal imagers.  It’s an issue I’ve previously addressed:

D/S/Cs know we get electricity from power plants, but they’re not quite so tuned into where the power plants get electricity, probably from, you know, electric stuff.  I mean, there’s lightning in the sky, and that’s electric, right?  So it’s like, ORGANIC!  That’s the approach that has worked so well for California, which is pretty much out of electricity, and at the most inconvenient times, like when people really need it.  Just wait until everyone has to drive electric vehicles!  We’ll just get electricity from the electric plants, which will get it from, you know, organic electric stuff, which is probably gluten free too!

Such towed chargers aren’t going to be ultra, mega, super-duper Omicron fast chargers.  They’d be too large, so charging/come and shoot me charging times are surely going to be larger, unless, of course, we can miniaturize fission reactors, which are also going to have an enormous heat signature.  There’s always the possibility of cracking cold fusion, and making fusion powerplants sufficiently small.  I wouldn’t be holding my breath on that one.  Maybe Tony Stark will license his Arc Reactor technology?

But OK, let’s play along.  Will the military have at least one EV pulling a diesel generator for every operational EV?  If not, there’s going to be a long line of operational EVs waiting for charging from a few diesel generators somewhere out there in the field, waiting not only for their turn at charging, but for enemy artillery or missiles to stop by for an enlightening visit.  And whatever mechanical efficiencies are realized from so-called savings due to “fewer moving parts” in vehicles will be lost to the huge numbers of diesel generators necessary to charge them.  Besides, electronic components don’t last forever either.

There will also have to be EV tanker trucks hauling the diesel for the generators.  So instead of merely transferring diesel fuel directly and rapidly from a tanker into the tanks of diesel-powered vehicles, soldiers will have to use it to fill generators, which will produce electricity to charge EVs and the EV tanker trucks, which will haul diesel to fill generators, which will produce electricity to charge EVs and EV tanker trucks, which…

Our enemies won’t have to bother destroying our war fighting machines.  They’ll just have to target the generators, which won’t take expensive missiles, only a few bucks worth of .50 caliber, or its metric equivalent, ammunition.  Still, our enemies will enjoy shooting up our EVs because the resulting explosions will be so pretty.

But EVs will reduce emissions and save the planet!  Climate Change!  Somehow I don’t think young American soldiers, particularly those in a war zone, will have that priority, and if they know they’ll be going into a military with vehicles particularly prone to spontaneous combustion, or running out of fuel with no way to very rapidly fuel up, there are going to be a lot fewer young Americans willing to reduce emissions and save the planet.

Our military will be wasting money necessary for training, which includes vehicles and ammunition, which means fewer vehicles, lagging technology, and much less ammunition.  Our enemies, who do not buy into climate change hysteria, will not.

What about battery powered military trucks, tanks, and other armored vehicles?  Absent the fusion breakthrough I previously mentioned, that’s not happening.  A Hummer-sized military EV traversing bad terrain in all weather conditions, carrying a load of equipment-laden troops with all of their gear and spare ammo is going to have only a fraction of the cheerleader range GM and federal bureaucrats claim.  Armored vehicles—armor weighs a very great deal–and trucks carrying heavy loads will have to be followed by EV trucks with massive generators to recharge them, and the EV trucks that haul the generators, every 100 miles, or less—very likely much less, because weight dramatically reduces EV range.

As I’ve previously written, the kind of “fundamental transformation” of the way we drive, travel and haul goods envisioned by D/S/Cs is not only impossible in terms of raw materials and cost, it’s a particularly stupid, and deadly, idea for military vehicles.  Of course if the military’s priority is stamping out non-existent white supremacy…

As I’ve also previously written, you don’t think our intellectually and morally superior self-imagined elite are going to limit themselves to the capabilities of electric vehicles, do you?  We’ll just have to take up their planet-saving slack, won’t we?