So you are a Army EV tank commander fighting in a foreign country, where do you get the electricity to charge the tank in the midst of a battle?

[M14 Shooter]

Oh I appreciate your comment...the only question I have will there be solar panels connected to the generator to create electricity to the generator OR
will the generator require gas/diesel fuel? HMMM ...

Diesel powered generators run on... diesel.

 

[Dadoalex]

You wrote:" If we chose to, the technology exists TODAY to build EV battlefield vehicles as well as transport both them and fuel supplies."
You provide no facts... just guesses that the technology exists today to operate EV tanks!
NOW that maybe true, I doubt it because YOU provide NO proof!
But that is NOT the reason it couldn't be done today!

Simple fact... where would the electricity come from that charges the batteries the EV Abrams tank ?
Electric Generating Capacities....TODAY with FACTS!!!
United States
Today electric generating plants in the USA create 4,165,030,000,000 kWh.
Total electricity generated in USA in 2021 by all 11,070 total power plants Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) !
Ukraine
Today electric generating plants in Ukraine create 62,624,000 kWh
Total electricity generated in USA in 2021 by all 743 total power plants Ukraine’s energy security landscape mapped: where are the country’s power plants located?

Since I couldn't find any statistics on how many kWh an Abrams EV tank would use I'm using a standard Semi-Truck kWh/mile of 2 kWh/mile.

Elon Musk: Tesla Semi Efficiency Is 1.7 kWh/mile

After the recent customer delivery event, Tesla CEO Elon Musk wrote on Twitter that the actual efficiency is even better than the official number from specs.

insideevs.com

So the Ukraine army with 1,000 EV Abrams tanks (if they existed...) traveling 50 miles a day 6 days a week, 52 weeks over 31,200,000 kWh or nearly half of the total Ukraine generating production of 62,624,000 kWh! AND THAT would be TODAY if possible!

OH wait the USA would pay Ukraine to build a solar panel farm that would generate the 31.2 million kWh.... right ..TODAY's technology right!!!
Or oh yea will build batteries that will be replaced batteries today that hold an average charge of 40kWh.

The average capacity is around 40kWh, Electric vehicles | Battery | Capacity and Lifespan.
Dadoalex... "Let it be clear"..."I'm not kidding"...(Using your idol Biden's favorite phrases...
"I guarantee We Are Going To Get Rid of Fossil Fuels” September 06, 2019, 5:49 PM


I'm not against EVs! What I am against is the ill planning to provide the electricity generating resources ! That fact has NOT been addressed by anyone in the media and much less the Biden administration nor for that fact the GOP ! With the CURRENT technology... Dadoalex.... generating 50% EVs in the USA we all, homeowners, condo, etc. that don't have solar panels or land big enough to hold the 34.214 Million solar panels or 18,409 square miles to hold them to generate the additional 18.331 TRILLION kWh to charge the 50% EVs. Current technology accounted for !
But again, you et.al. don't seem to comprehend where the electricity comes from to charge the batteries of the re-chargers to charge an EV!
I feel like the 10 year old kid watching adults scratching their heads wondering how to remove a truck stuck under a bridge and the kid yelling
" let some air out of the tires"!! Why don't people comprehend that EVs use electricity and where will that electricity come from?

Again, your inability to stay on the topic renders your responses irrelevant.

How do we get fuel to the battlefield today?
There ya go.

 

[Dadoalex]

I call bullshit. If you had any science courses you'd see how ridiculous EV tanks are, at least for the foreseeable future.
For a continuation please see my post #236 above.
You're basing your position on the assumption that at some point in the future EV tanks would be viable.
That does NOT help today's US military, EV tank research today will only waste money and hurt readiness.

Call Joe if you want.
Your responses have nothing to do with the science or the capability but your unreasoning hate of all things "green" BECAUSE that's what you've been told you need to hate.

Are solar powered airplanes possible?
Battery powered cars?
Geez. Step out of 1957and, at least, into the late 20th century.

 

[kyzr]

Call Joe if you want.
Your responses have nothing to do with the science or the capability but your unreasoning hate of all things "green" BECAUSE that's what you've been told you need to hate.

Are solar powered airplanes possible?
Battery powered cars?
Geez. Step out of 1957and, at least, into the late 20th century.

1. If the US switched to all EV tanks by 2030 would that affect climate change by at least 0.01% yes or no? ANS: NO. Zero change. Its science, not hate.
Switching to EV tanks by 2030 is moronic, asinine, impractical, and deadly to US tank crews. I hope the US military isn't that stupid. The US is sitting on billions of barrles of oil. If the US wants batteries we need to buy yhem from China. See any fatal flaw in using EV tanks?

2. Solar powered passenger planes are not possible. Cars, yes. You haven't been able to do the math required to demonstrate that EV tanks are practical by 2030.
You're posting with someone who actually used i286, i386, i486, Pentiums, up thru today's modern PC. Look at Moore's Law and how CPUs advanced over the years. Battery power may track

3. Tanks are NOT mentioned in the following military article, just Humvees and smaller vehicles. The battery issue viz China is a problem, so is disposal of old batteries.

Electric Military Vehicles Are Part of Biden Climate Agenda, Pentagon Says

The military's non-tactical vehicle fleet alone is the second largest in the federal government next to the U.S. Postal Service.

www.military.com

The lithium ion batteries so crucial to hybrid and electric cars and trucks now create two major challenges. Disposal of the toxic materials could be a major environmental issue, effectively trading greenhouse gas emissions for other pollution. And China, the top U.S. adversary, controls the global supply.
China reportedly produces about two-thirds of the batteries. The Biden administration and members of Congress have been scrambling to boost U.S. production and domestic mining of materials to make the components, after Beijing rose to global dominance in solar power a decade ago through heavy investment.

 

[Seymour Flops]

A couple or three points:

1) Electric tanks would have many advantages, such as less noice and less smoke emissions.

2) That said, the technology is simply not available to effective employ them in a foreign country in the foreseeable future. Setting a deadline of less than twenty years is absurd. In the last twenty years, we have not seen nearly enough advancement in battery and generation technology to say that we are on a path to deploy electric tanks in the next twenty.

3) Current Diesel powered tanks also have logistics problems when deployed to foreign countries, which is a big part of the reason we rarely do so. Countries that we invade are unlikely to have charging stations enough for our tanks to use, but neither do we rely on their corner gas stations for diesel. Where we send in tanks, we send in fuel, in the form of tanker ships, tanker trucks, bladders of fuel dropped by air, and Petroleum Oil and Lubricants (POL) units to set up remote fueling and servicing points. Someday, when the technology catches up, we will have similar logistic arrangement for electric tanks.

Someday.

4) It is much easier and more efficient to set up logistical support for tanks and other military equipment in our own country where we can take our time, guard them from sabatage, upgrade as needed, and provide jobs for Americans building and staffing them. Leading to:

5) Why the heck don't we just get out of the business of sending tanks into foreign countries? We don't need to send tanks to Ukraine, we just need to stay out of the latest example of Europeons going feral. Tanks are awesome weapons for defending a large land that might be invaded by sea or air. They won't stop the actual invasion, but they are perfect for decimating the invasion forces if they do get past our coastal and air defense. Assuming they got past our sea defense, which is unlikely.

So we would have a three layer (at least) line of defense against invation: Coastal protection by the Navy, ships having been pulled from dubious missions around the world, fortifications and troops at coastlines and borders, and bombers and mobile shock armor collumns to destroy anyone who gets through those. Tanks cannot defend the U.S. if they are busy invading Russia, historically a very bad idea.

 

[healthmyths]

I call bullshit. If you had any science courses you'd see how ridiculous EV tanks are, at least for the foreseeable future.
For a continuation please see my post #236 above.
You're basing your position on the assumption that at some point in the future EV tanks would be viable.
That does NOT help today's US military, EV tank research today will only waste money and hurt readiness.

There is a very very major difference between a device that today requires
Charging your phone once per day uses 0.035 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per week, 0.15 kWh per month, and about 1.83 kWh per year.

How Many Watts Does a Phone Charger Use? | EnergySage

Phone chargers are an extremely important part of our daily lives. Find out here how much electricity they actually use.

news.energysage.com

Please would some expert here tell me how much energy is needed to move a 55 ton object one mile.

M1 Abrams Tank - First Division Museum

The M1 Abrams Tank is known for its stabilized gun and ability to shoot accurately on the move. It is also known for its superior crew protection.

www.fdmuseum.org

Again, your inability to stay on the topic renders your responses irrelevant.

How do we get fuel to the battlefield today?
There ya go.

Pretty simple to find out but I know using the internet is just too complicated for you!

ROM operations become a force multiplier for maneuver units by enabling the combatant commander longer operational reach deep into the enemy's battlespace, potentially catching them out of position and off guard.

During contingency operations, the decision to conduct a ROM is carefully analyzed by the commander because it involves allocating a large percentage of direct support fuel assets that would normally be used to support a brigade.

Additionally, a ROM presents a high-value target to the enemy. A huge portion of the division's fuel assets, as well as its maneuver units, could be caught while assembled in one location, making them very vulnerable to attack.

https://www.army.mil/article/159656/maintaining_momentum_through_refuel_on_the_move

Now I am not going to define a "ROM" but will let you find out to learn how to substantiate your personal and definitely UNINFORMED comment.

But Abrams tanks get gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Note maximum fuel capacity of 11,600 gallons.
Average Abrams Fuel capacity 504.4 US gallons (1,909 L)
So one tanker can refuel 23 Abrams tanks.
BUT people like you believe EV Abram tanks could be refueled by EV battery re-charge process.

So where will the EV charging tankers get the electricity?
A 3 foot by 5 foot solar panel generates with five hours of direct sunlight each day, your equation would look like this: five hours x 250 watts = 1,250 watt-hours or about 1.3 kilowatt-hours daily per panel.

https://www.gotrhythm.com/blog/solar-energy/how-much-power-does-a-solar-panel-produce

Hmmm so how many re-charging trucks with a 3x5 solar panel generating 1.3 kWh/day /panel with each panel needing 15 square feet.
Well a standard flatbed trailer is 48 feet long and 8.5 feet wide, providing more than 400 square feet of surface to support a load.

HM... 400 square feet divided by 15 square per panel would be 26 solar panels each generating 1.3 kWh or a total of 34 kWh.
So 34 kWh divided by 2 kWh to go 1 mile, would mean the Flatbed semi-truck with 26 solar panels would be able to travel 17 miles BUT will have exhausted
the 34 kWh created by the 26 solar panels... leaving nothing to charge a SINGLE Abrams tank that will require 33 kWh to travel 1 mile!
A analysis that provides some questions that have yet to be answered!
And of course the flat bed truck is an EV ...But it also uses according these experts:
The Class 8 entry is estimated to charge up to 70% level in 30 minutes and consumes less than 2 kWh per mile

Tesla preps for first Semi deliveries as it breaks into Class 8 market

Tesla (TSLA) will hold an event on December 1 at the Gigafactory in Nevada to commemorate the first deliveries of the all-electric Semi Class 8 truck. Read more.

seekingalpha.com

So the EV re-charging truck using the electricity IT's solar panels created would be able to travel in day day before using up it's own stored in solar panel batteries the 34 kWh generated by the panels!
So how can a EV Semi-truck traveling 17 miles and consuming the 34 kWh it's 26 solar panels created be able to charge the Abrams EV?
a l arge gasoline Class 8 Truck can then fuel typically have capacities ranging from 5,500 to 11,600 US gallons
An Abrams tank gas tank holds 504.4 US gallons (1,909 and uses 0.6 miles per gallon to go one mile.

Tank truck - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thus 1 gasoline tanker can fuel from 10 to 21 Abrams tanks... BUT!!!

1 EV recharging tanker can charge 1 EV Abrams tanker!

FACTs I know are hard to handle but people Like DADOALEX not only can't handle facts but are just too lazy to follow the FACTS!!!

 

[Dagosa]

Granholm's call for 100% EV military puts 'electric tanks,' green agenda before national security: critics​

Granholm's call for 100% EV military puts 'electric tanks,' green agenda before national security: critics

President Biden's energy secretary, Michigan Democrat Jennifer Granholm, wants to see a fully-electric military by the year 2030, causing controversy among critics.

www.foxnews.com

I saw her comments about tanks being EVs
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm received blowback from critics this week after she testified before the Senate in support of a plan to fully establish an all-electric vehicle fleet in the U.S. military by the 2030s, leading some observers to wonder if the Biden administration believes politics trumps national security.
An Abrams tank uses about a 2 gallons of fuel to go over 1 mile at Maximum Speed: 42 mph with a Range: 265 mi.
M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank - Specifications.
So if an EV uses 1 mi/kWh = a car traveling 33.705 Miles for one gallon of gas... then an EV to equal traveling 33 miles /gallon
would require 33 kWh.

Miles per Kilowatt-Hour to Miles per Gallon Gasoline Equivalent Conversion

Convert miles per kilowatt-hour to miles per gallon gasoline equivalent (mi/kWh to MPGe) with the electric car efficiency conversion calculator, and learn the formula.

www.inchcalculator.com

So to travel the 265 miles range of an Abrams tank would require the equivalent of 33 kWh X 265 miles or 8,745 kWh.
A 100 kWh battery pack in the Model S weighs 1,377 pounds How Much Does a Tesla Battery Weigh?
An Abrams tank using 8,745 kWh to travel 265 miles (8,745kWh/85kWh) or another 60 tons to the weight.
M1 Abrams Tank - First Division Museum
So not only would the over 6,000 Abrams takes now weigh an additional 60 tons for the 87 batteries to the U.S. Army is believed to have 2,509 Abrams in various versions, with an additional 3,700 in storage.

The History Of The Abrams Tank

The Biden administration has announced it will send 31 M1 Abrams battle tanks to Ukraine in what Kyiv authorities are hailing as a possible game-changer in a war that is now 11 months old. RFE/RL takes a quick look at the Abrams's history and its specs.

www.rferl.org

But each tank would use 8,745 kWh per tank to travel 265 miles per tank.
Where will the 52,470,000 kWh come from especially in a winter season when EVs have trouble traveling in the cold?

OR where will the military's 170,000 non-tactical vehicles — the cars and trucks we use on our bases, get the electricity?

U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

Remember electricity is NOT made by the re-chargers. Electricity is generated by solar panels (each 3'ftX5'Ft panel generates
Most residential solar panels on today’s market are rated to produce between 250 and 400 watts each per hour or in a sunny day

How much energy do solar panels produce for your home | YES Energy Solutions

More people are beginning to see the numerous benefits solar panels can bring, both environmentally and financially. Learn exactly how much electricity solar panels could generate for your household.

www.yesenergysolutions.co.uk

With an average of 3348 hours of sunlight per year one panel at 400 watts/hour will generate 1,339 kWh.

AGAIN where will all the electricity come from to power military EVs especially in foreign countries? And how will that electricity get to the
re-chargers? OH... yea right... fossil fuel converted into gasoline power generators. RIGHT!!!

All made up shit.there will be no EV tanks until their charging times is the same as refueling time of present day tanks. We have waiting solid state batteries that will soon be able to do it
But deniers will find something else to whine about by then. .

 

[kyzr]

All made up shit.there will be no EV tanks until their charging times is the same as refueling time of present day tanks. We have waiting solid state batteries that will soon be able to do it
But deniers will find something else to whine about by then. .

Got a link for that claim or are you talking thru your ass again.

 

[candycorn]

Got a link for that claim or are you talking thru your ass again.

The OP cites the Energy Secretary...not the SECDEF. The Secretary of Energy has zero to do with weapons systems.

 

[kyzr]

The OP cites the Energy Secretary...not the SECDEF. The Secretary of Energy has zero to do with weapons systems.

Biden's admin is full of morons who have no fucking clue about the subject matter regarding the departments they run.
As long as they are deviants they pass the Biden qualifications

Get to Know Biden's Many LGBTQ+ Appointed Officials

It's not just Pete Buttigieg. The Biden administration has a plethora of LGBTQ+ appointees positioned to help reverse Trump's harmful policies.

www.advocate.com

 

[candycorn]

Biden's admin is full of morons who have no fucking clue about the subject matter regarding the departments they run.

And Omarosa was a Rhodes Scholar? Trump fired most of his "best people"...did they "have a clue"?


Anyway...the citation came from the Energy Secretary (if you can believe the source who quoted them)...it didn't come from the SECDEF. So that is why you won't see solar tanks.

The OP is suffering from paranoia and posts nonsensical bullshit at an alarming rate.

 

[kyzr]

And Omarosa was a Rhodes Scholar? Trump fired most of his "best people"...did they "have a clue"?
Anyway...the citation came from the Energy Secretary (if you can believe the source who quoted them)...it didn't come from the SECDEF. So that is why you won't see solar tanks.
The OP is suffering from paranoia and posts nonsensical bullshit at an alarming rate.

1. What department did Omarosa run?
2. Biden department heads have no clue what lane they are in because they are unqualified.
3. The Trump admin was always under an MSM microscope. Trump held frequent press conferences and always answered the press questions. Biden is so senile "they" won't let him in front of a microphone unless he's reading a teleprompter.

 

[healthmyths]

All made up shit.there will be no EV tanks until their charging times is the same as refueling time of present day tanks. We have waiting solid state batteries that will soon be able to do it
But deniers will find something else to whine about by then. .

Curious as to exactly what advantage solid state battery has because almost all current EV batteries depend on lithium supplied by the # 1 country leading in CO2 emissions. While the rest of the world spends Trillions on battery power that funds China's economy, no one seems to pressure China to reduce their CO2!

 

[Dagosa]

That said, the technology is simply not available to effective employ them in a foreign country in the foreseeable future. Setting a deadline of less than twenty years is absurd. In the last twenty years, we have not seen nearly enough advancement in battery and generation technology to say that we are on a path to deploy electric tanks in the next twenty.

Actually, the technology is all here. Electric motor powered tanks which is much more advantageous then any other propulsion system can easily come to fruition with fuel cell technology. Hydrogen fuel cells for example eliminate the need for fossil fuels and is derived from water. The military isn‘t held back by commercial limitations. It has many hundreds of micronuclear power plants that could easily supply the energy necessary to extract the hydrogen at ever fuel depot. It just needs water…

 

[Dagosa]

Curious as to exactly what advantage solid state battery has because almost all current EV batteries depend on lithium supplied by the # 1 country leading in CO2 emissions. While the rest of the world spends Trillions on battery power that funds China's economy, no one seems to pressure China to reduce their CO2!
View attachment 782703

Solid state batteries aren’t limited to exotic minerals. The sodium battery is one alternative.

Why are you so upset with China ?
They are a manufacturing base only because of their cheap labor. It’s up to the United States to lead the way, not China.
More fear mongering.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A couple or three points:
1) Electric tanks would have many advantages, such as less noice and less smoke emissions.

Less. Tracks are loud.
Diesels are louder than turbines.

2) That said, the technology is simply not available to effective employ them in a foreign country in the foreseeable future.

Or to create them in the first place.

3) Current Diesel powered tanks also have logistics problems when deployed to foreign countries, which is a big part of the reason we rarely do so. Countries that we invade are unlikely to have charging stations enough for our tanks to use, but neither do we rely on their corner gas stations for diesel. Where we send in tanks, we send in fuel, in the form of tanker ships, tanker trucks, bladders of fuel dropped by air, and Petroleum Oil and Lubricants (POL) units to set up remote fueling and servicing points. Someday, when the technology catches up, we will have similar logistic arrangement for electric tanks.

Yes. We'll be carrying in diesel to run the generators.
Logistically, diesel is our very best option and likely weill be until we develop CONEX-size nuke plants

4) It is much easier and more efficient to set up logistical support for tanks and other military equipment in our own country where we can take our time, guard them from sabatage, upgrade as needed, and provide jobs for Americans building and staffing them. Leading to:

5) Why the heck don't we just get out of the business of sending tanks into foreign countries?

That's great, but we need the capacity to deploy.

So we would have a three layer (at least) line of defense against invation: Coastal protection by the Navy, ships having been pulled from dubious missions around the world, fortifications and troops at coastlines and borders, and bombers and mobile shock armor collumns to destroy anyone who gets through those.

SLOC. We need to defend, if not control, them.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But Abrams tanks get gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Note maximum fuel capacity of 11,600 gallons.
Average Abrams Fuel capacity 504.4 US gallons (1,909 L)
So one tanker can refuel 23 Abrams tanks.
BUT people like you believe EV Abram tanks could be refueled by EV battery re-charge process.

Some people simply have no understanding how much energy fighting vehicles use in combat.
That 504 gallons of diesel at 40% efficincy, represents about 8000kWh. An Abrams in the fields uses about 1000kW per hour.

 

[healthmyths]

Solid state batteries aren’t limited to exotic minerals. The sodium battery is one alternative.

Why are you so upset with China ?
They are a manufacturing base only because of their cheap labor. It’s up to the United States to lead the way, not China.
More fear mongering.

China's Repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang

Council on Foreign Relations Council on Foreign Relations › backgrounder › china-xinjiang-uy...
Sep 22, 2022 — The Chinese government has reportedly arbitrarily detained more than a million Muslims in reeducation camps since 2017.

China’s electric vehicle battery supply chain shows signs of forced labor, report says​

The International Energy Agency predicts that, by 2040, the demand for lithium, nickel, graphite, and cobalt used in EV batteries could jump by a staggering 30 times. And that’s where China smartly has a stranglehold, since it controls 70 percent of the world’s lithium supplies, for example, and almost all of the world’s graphite.

China's electric vehicle battery supply chain shows signs of forced labor, report says

There are indications that Chinese companies that produce raw materials for EV batteries use forced labor, according to The New York Times.

www.cnbc.com

Obviously you agree with China in your hatred of Muslims, acceptance of slave labor which reduces labor costs for EV components.
What is your solution?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Actually, the technology is all here. Electric motor powered tanks which is much more advantageous then any other propulsion system can easily come to fruition with fuel cell technology. Hydrogen fuel cells for example eliminate the need for fossil fuels and is derived from water. The military isn‘t held back by commercial limitations. It has many hundreds of micronuclear power plants that could easily supply the energy necessary to extract the hydrogen at ever fuel depot. It just needs water…

How large would a hydrogen fuel cell need to be to power an Abrams tank for say 250 miles?

Asking, not nitpicking. I really don't know.

I saw a piece about fuel cell cars years ago, and the idea was to have the fuel cells as flat or slightly three inch think pieces beneath the fiberglass body of the vehicle. Not sure that would work out well for a tank, but maybe this tech is much improved?

 

[Dagosa]

How large would a hydrogen fuel cell need to be to power an Abrams tank for say 250 miles?

Asking, not nitpicking. I really don't know.

I saw a piece about fuel cell cars years ago, and the idea was to have the fuel cells as flat or slightly three inch think pieces beneath the fiberglass body of the vehicle. Not sure that would work out well for a tank, but maybe this tech is much improved?

Fuel cell electric cars have a range of plus 300 miles. So they are comparable to gas and diesel engines in that realm. So, how large is a fuel cell in a car ? About 18 lBS of hydrogen is needed to power a car 300 miles. That compares to favorably 140 lBS of gasoline. So it’s a fraction of the weight.

It seems reasonable that a fuel cell electric in a tank would have comparable range to its diesel equivalent. The weight savings would be huge as the weight savings in hydrogen and electric motors which are much smaller then their comparable diesel plus you eliminate the transmission. The fuel supply is inexhaustible and totally not dependent upon upon fossil fuel companies here or abroad.