Ford News EV Bronco and Ranger

CrazyIvan

Active Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
28
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger
Ironically you've touched on something I'm very familiar with and I have no illusions to the effects of mining. I travel to mines all over the world as part of my job as a mineral processing engineer and have worked in mines on five different continents. From the middle of the Congo, to Oz, Canada and Brazil, mining is HORRIBLE for the environment no matter the mineral being processed. Have you looked at oil sands? Forestry? Fisheries? Look at a picture of the Amazon forest today compared to 40 years ago. Devastating.

1622140332242.png


Using your example the lithium mine is larger in scale to the process used for extraction. Lithium is usually found in lake beds, sea beds, salt flats etc and typically isn't mined deeper than 50 meters and then put through leaching processes, therefore larger areas are required compared to pit mining like iron, copper, gold etc. that also use leaching processes among others.

Nevertheless, the manufacturing of goods requires raw materials. Practices have improved drastically over the past couple of decades but always room for improvement.

Cheers.
Lithium is used for all types of batteries correct? So if we are going to rail against EV's then we should be equally concerned that tech companies want us to buy new devices every year?

If the naysayers really cared about the environment then I would agree. This is really about rallying against a technology they see as a threat to their ability to continue to drive ICE vehicles and continue to buy vehicles that, lets face it, we don't really need.
 

Jamesb

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
126
Reaction score
292
Location
Vancouver, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2020 Ford Ranger Lariat, 501A, Build Date 12/19
Occupation
Engineering
Lithium is used for all types of batteries correct? So if we are going to rail against EV's then we should be equally concerned that tech companies want us to buy new devices every year?

If the naysayers really cared about the environment then I would agree. This is really about rallying against a technology they see as a threat to their ability to continue to drive ICE vehicles and continue to buy vehicles that, lets face it, we don't really need.
Correct, Great points... can you imagine what the guys who sold horses said to Henry Ford? I can only imagine he wasn't that popular with them...

EV's are the next step in evolution of transport, no matter how hard some don't like it or OPEC fights it. "Who killed the electric car?" google it if you haven't seen it. :bandit: All the while Ford announces an additional 8 billion investment in EV, on top of the 22 they already committed to this week and stock jumps 6%.

It will be many many many years yet before ICE are extinct...probably well after I leave this planet. lol

Cheers.
 

Deleted member 9836

We're going to have to expand our space efforts and begin mining moons, planets and asteroids...
 

Deleted member 1634

Ironically you've touched on something I'm very familiar with and I have no illusions to the effects of mining. I travel to mines all over the world as part of my job as a mineral processing engineer and have worked in mines on five different continents. From the middle of the Congo, to Oz, Canada and Brazil, mining is HORRIBLE for the environment no matter the mineral being processed. Have you looked at oil sands? Forestry? Fisheries? Look at a picture of the Amazon forest today compared to 40 years ago. Devastating.

1622140332242.png


Using your example the lithium mine is larger in scale to the process used for extraction. Lithium is usually found in lake beds, sea beds, salt flats etc and typically isn't mined deeper than 50 meters and then put through leaching processes, therefore larger areas are required compared to pit mining like iron, copper, gold etc. that also use leaching processes among others.

Nevertheless, the manufacturing of goods requires raw materials. Practices have improved drastically over the past couple of decades but always room for improvement.

Cheers.
But my point was that lithium mines aren't larger in scale. The largest lithium mines in the world are only a fraction the size of the iron mines around here just in Northern Minnesota, let alone larger ones around the world.
The lithium mine in my previous post is only 2.5 miles in the longest dimension and maybe 2500 acres.
The iron mine I shared is an over 11 mile long 2 mile wide scar and encompasses about 14,000 acres just for the open pit alone. And there's another 11,000 acre one very close by. And a 3000 acre one next to that one.
Heck, the iron mine near where I grew up in Michigan has become both the highest and lowest points in the state and encompasses around 7000 acres just for the pit.
Just the drainage pool and tailings piles for each of these iron mines are 4-5 times the size of that whole lithium mine at about 10,000 acres.

It is definitely "cleaner" than it was in the past. I've seen first hand the long lasting affects of old mining practices. Toxic beaches, poisoned swamps, forests that will never grow again. All of which are within a few hours drive of my current location in the great US of A.

All I'm trying to convey is that this idea that lithium mining (or mining of any materials for technological items) is somehow the most destructive thing we can do to the planet is off the mark. We already do incredibly destructive acts on much larger scales just to build the other non-technological things we use and have for centuries. And as you've noted we're still deforesting the rainforest at an all too alarming rate. So it's not just limited to mining.
 


AzScorpion

Moderator
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Threads
280
Messages
21,289
Reaction score
101,269
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Ranger Tremor
Occupation
CEO of DeeZee
We're going to have to expand our space efforts and begin mining moons, planets and asteroids...
Naww that's where the govt plans on dumping all our EV batteries next. It's part of their "Green new deal" package. ?
 
OP
OP
Ronbo

Ronbo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ron
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Threads
14
Messages
614
Reaction score
3,198
Location
FL, CT, TX
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger XLT FX4+
Occupation
Retired LEO Sgt., USAF & USA Veteran.
Vehicle Showcase
1
Iron from Iron mines is used to make more that just automobiles. Buildings, ships, trains, etc, use iron ore. So of course the mines are going to be bigger, wider, larger, etc. more materials needed to produce all that iron stuff. EV cars will not eliminate iron mining unless you can figure out how to build cars, buildings and ships out of spaghetti noodles. To suggest that because Lithium mines are less impactful to our environment because they are generally smaller does not equate, and does not make any sense. I’d like to know what kind of impact this will all have when we eventually transition to an all-EV society where everybody is driving a battery powered car or truck, and the ICE and fossil fuels become extinct? We will still be mining iron to build cars and such, but now we will add increasing lithium mining to the equation. Have we really thought this all out logically? Before the car, we had horses. But we had a cleaner environment and air, water, etc. And how do we produce more electricity to supply all these EV’s? Power plants are being decommissioned, nuclear, coal, and others? Where will this power come from to power some 287,000,000 cars just in the US? We can’t even keep the lights on now on our failing electrical grid system and we’re gonna eventually add upwards of 300 million electric cars to our grid?

Just some rambling thoughts. I hope to be driving a PHEV in a couple of years. ?
 

VegasP11

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ian
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
205
Reaction score
607
Location
Kansas
Vehicle(s)
2019 Lariat FX4
Iron from Iron mines is used to make more that just automobiles. Buildings, ships, trains, etc, use iron ore. So of course the mines are going to be bigger, wider, larger, etc. more materials needed to produce all that iron stuff. EV cars will not eliminate iron mining unless you can figure out how to build cars, buildings and ships out of spaghetti noodles. To suggest that because Lithium mines are less impactful to our environment because they are generally smaller does not equate, and does not make any sense. I’d like to know what kind of impact this will all have when we eventually transition to an all-EV society where everybody is driving a battery powered car or truck, and the ICE and fossil fuels become extinct? We will still be mining iron to build cars and such, but now we will add increasing lithium mining to the equation. Have we really thought this all out logically? Before the car, we had horses. But we had a cleaner environment and air, water, etc. And how do we produce more electricity to supply all these EV’s? Power plants are being decommissioned, nuclear, coal, and others? Where will this power come from to power some 287,000,000 cars just in the US? We can’t even keep the lights on now on our failing electrical grid system and we’re gonna eventually add upwards of 300 million electric cars to our grid?

Just some rambling thoughts. I hope to be driving a PHEV in a couple of years. ?
I think the point was that whenever someone brings up EV's a certain crowd always screams that it's not better than an ICE vehicle and always cites the mining for Lithium argument. However, those same folks never seem to have a complaint about other types of mining or oil drilling (as long as it doesn't obstruct the view from their back yard).
 

biggestjosh

Well-Known Member
First Name
Josh
Joined
Feb 28, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
49
Reaction score
176
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2021 Ranger
Until the EV's can go nearly 500 miles on a charge/tank, fill up in 15 minutes and continue ICEs will be relevant.
The technology is actually almost there. Kia's new EV6 will have a range of 300 miles, but will be able to charge from 10% to 80% in 18 minutes, which is crazy to think about. Plus, you can get it with 577 horsepower :shock:
 

TechnicallyReal

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
460
Reaction score
606
Location
Eh?
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ranger Lariat 4x4
Occupation
Software Engineer / IT Admin
This is one of those topics that I don't want to get sucked into but I do want to throw it out there that most of the bad things about EV happen to be the things that are evolving rapidly for the better, so a lot of the arguments made against them may become irrelevant over night.

For example when it comes to creating and disposing of batteries.. battery technology is improving all the time and we're already seeing the promise of a "million mile" battery (a battery that can be recharged over and over without becoming useless before hitting a million miles). There are new types of batteries being developed from different materials. There are methods to recycle and reuse depleted batteries. There's so much going on there, that it seems like arguing about the bad side of how things are done now is pointless, as it'll all be different next time you check.

Also people seem to forget how much more there is under the hood of an ICE compared to an EV and how much of that they need to maintain or replace, most of which doesn't exist in an EV to be replaced or maintained at all. It's not just an engine under your hood but also many more fluids (which have to be mined or refined and later disposed of) as well as rare earth metals in things like catalytic converters, more sensors, more tubing, more piping, more bearings, more gaskets and o-rings, more things to rust and develop holes and eventually fail. EV's aren't immune to everything.. but there are certainly a lot fewer things to break, maintain, or replace. That's less to mine, and less to send to the landfill.

I don't know why people get their panties in a bunch anyway. ICE vehicles aren't going anywhere any time soon, despite what you might think the law says about it.
 

Jason B

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jason
Joined
May 19, 2021
Threads
6
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
6,268
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
2021 XL STX SE 4x2
Occupation
machinist
Driving an EV for daily commute is practical as you can keep it charged at home. But we have a long way to go before EV's can be used for any hauling or towing over distances. Sure your Cyber Truck may have a range of 250 miles, but pull a load and you may get 100 miles out of it. In time we will get to a point where EV's can be used for hauling.

This guy has a lengthy and technical explanation. Cyber Truck starts at 11:00
Why Teslas Are Bad At Towing (Today) - YouTube

And then there big rigs.....
And transoceanic shipping....
And trains.....
And planes.....
 

asimpson997

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
15
Reaction score
8
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger Lariat FX4
20% US power is renewable, 20% coal, 40% natural gas and 20% nuclear. plus what is kWh cost per tank as most EV will get you 250 mile max? We seem to trade one fossil fuel for another in my mind.
 

TechnicallyReal

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
460
Reaction score
606
Location
Eh?
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ranger Lariat 4x4
Occupation
Software Engineer / IT Admin
I guess the massive increased demand for electricity will be supplied by rainbows and unicorn farts.
That's another area where things keep changing for the better, though. Solar keeps getting cheaper and more efficient. Some people are charging their cars at home without pulling from the grid at all.
 

viperwolf

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alex
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Threads
37
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
3,536
Location
TN US and PHilippines
Vehicle(s)
2020 Ford Everest 4x4 Titanium BI Turbo, 2015 Ford Ecosport Titanium
Occupation
Retired Military
Good arguments
My thought is, if the government wants to flood the world with EV, how are the power grids going to keep up. It takes Fossil fuels to run big power, there are not enough hydro damns or solar to keep up with demand. They barley can do the jobs in the areas they were built. We need a break through in making power, I mean a major one like Fusion. We would also need to make synthetic materials that dont require fuels.
If 50% of the vehicles in California where electric, I dont think it could maintain that type of load. Im definitely not an expert on that, just guessing.
Im not sure we want Nuclear Plants everywhere, the cost and the uranium is another realm of disaster.
Gas engines today are the most efficient we ever had.
Good power out the small engines that the old big blocks would make.
The big blocks today are what the old dragsters would make.
They burn cleaner than ever before, I mean you can stick your nose to and exhaust pipe today. Remember not many years ago you would choke to death.
We will find another source of power, we wont have a choice if they want EVs to run everything.


To be honest, I dont think either side cares about the environment, only we the people do. Its all about money and power to them. There is always a hidden consequence to technology, just like everything else in this industry.
Sponsored

 
 



Top