Antarctica - A wall of ice?

  • 269 Replies
  • 44080 Views
*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • 17774
  • +6/-4
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #150 on: September 23, 2022, 01:20:27 PM »
Nevermind. I see where they are saying the car wouldn't even be able to start if the key battery died. I guess that kind of indicates they think there couldn't be a passive RFID thing going on.

Edit: clarification. Also, disclaimer, I'm not in any way an RFID nerd (I know you know that already Mikey T, but just to make sure no one makes the mistake of thinking I'm trying to speak from a place of strong foundational knowledge... I've just built the Pi keyfob repeater before), I know precious little about the tech beyond very broad strokes.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2022, 01:24:38 PM by boydster »

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-34
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #151 on: September 23, 2022, 03:38:07 PM »
Touchless ignition? Now, you may think this is progress because it looks like progress. But it's a bad feature. The key  can be dummied by an RF frequency allowing people to steal your car ever more quickly than a hot wire.
Oh please, give us your take on how RFID works.  One of my specialties btw.  Go on, tell us how to "dummy" it.  This isn't the movies. 
Go on, tell us.

One of your specialties? Huh.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID_skimming

If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #152 on: September 23, 2022, 04:40:02 PM »
It depends on how complex it is.

The early RF stuff like a garage door opener was just sending a relatively short code, one way.
This allows it to easily be circumvented by just quickly sweeping all the codes.

More advanced versions used longer codes, requiring it to be read from the device to then be replayed.

More more advanced versions use one time codes, so a replay attack wont work.

And others use 2 way communication where the device to be unlocked sends an encrypted message which is read and processed by the RFID device which sends an encrypted response.

This is quite different to the RFID skimming used for credit cards, as you aren't circumventing the RFID technology to use contactless payment.
Instead you are trying to get the details from the card, to determine enough information to make a purchase online from dodgy stores which require too little information for the purchase.

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-34
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #153 on: September 23, 2022, 04:59:48 PM »
General statements get general answers.

RFID is RFID, regardless of what it's being utilized with.

RFID skimming is most commonly referenced to credit/debit card skimming; however, RFID skimming is simply the malicious reading and copying of the information contained within the RFID tag remotely.

RFID can be read using over the counter equipment.

While certain RFID setups can utilize additional countermeasures to make it harder to read and duplicate as you stated, that's not always the case, nor are those countermeasures impervious.  It just makes reading and duplication more difficult.




« Last Edit: September 23, 2022, 05:12:05 PM by NotSoSkeptical »
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #154 on: September 23, 2022, 05:21:10 PM »
I dislike lumping together all RFID and acting like it is the same.

That would be like saying all keys are keys, treating a key which literally just turns a lock the same as one with security pins.

Yes, all can be bypassed, that applies for literally everything. But some are trivial, and some are incredibly complex and unlikely to be defeated with current devices in any reasonable period of time. i.e. it would be easier to hack the ECU.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #155 on: September 23, 2022, 06:12:50 PM »

Touchless ignition? Now, you may think this is progress because it looks like progress. But it's a bad feature. The key  can be dummied by an RF frequency allowing people to steal your car ever more quickly than a hot wire.
Oh please, give us your take on how RFID works.  One of my specialties btw.  Go on, tell us how to "dummy" it.  This isn't the movies. 
Go on, tell us.
I don't mean to hand them a lifeline here, but building a device that listens for keyfobs trying to interact with a vehicle, records the signal, and then can repeat it at will is something that's already been widely published with step-by-step guides for anyone with even a very limited technical skillset. So door locks and remote starters are great vectors for attack. I have a feeling that's a separate thing than the RFID that tells the car your have the actual key fob inside the vehicle before you are able to start or drive it though, for cars that have that sort of system in place, although it's not something I've looked into so you undoubtedly would know better than I.

But, I mean, for unlocking a vehicle of a certain age that might also have a remote starter installed which could also be vulnerable, you can use a Raspberry Pi with a battery and just a few add-ons to have some fun. I suspect b's idea comes from some sort of awareness of this kind of attack though.
RFID isn't about a frequency.  You are talking about old school key fobs that send a specific radio frequency signal when you hit a button.  Thats not RFID.  That's not what was said, or what was being talked about.  I would expect them to conflate these things on purpose, you I understand as being ignorant of the technology.
Maybe I missed a post. The one you quoted doesn't say RFID. It talks about using a device to defeat a keyless entry and keyless ignition, and it phrases things poorly (as expected, considering the source...), but the heart of it is what I just said - defeating keyless entry/starting.
He likes to do stupid shit in his replies so it looks like I cut out what he responded to.  My mistake there.  He was talking about RFID touchless ignition.  Keyless starting is primarily done by mid range RFID, or around 5 ghz activation range.  The ID on the key transmits nothing really unless polled correctly with the correct message bits enabled, with code, timing of bit spacing, and " we will call it individual bit parity.  This reports the fobs ID number.  This must be previously paired with the system or programmed in to act as a digital key. Also incorrect reports, such as you happening to get to the car with the incorrect Fob and initiate the hard challenge ( attempting to unlock the door or start the vehicle) can and does add that incorrect Fob to the temporary  blacklist for faster denials.  It can also temporarily in rare cases temporarily disable the Active RFID device (car) if the blacklist gets filled up faster than it can timeout the older entries.  Aka if you try to brute force it with a sequencer of ID numbers it will shut off the ability to pole for IDs and lock down the device for a set number of cycles, which is either random or closely guarded.
There is a presence sweep done also for the key that already opened the device to assist in not leaving the car running and leaving with your fob.  And another hard pole for when you lock your doors with the ignition off after opening and closing the door and the strength of the Fob signal is evaluated to make sure you are not locking your fob in the car. 
But it isn't done by rotating frequencies, it is an active data flow between the two devices.  The battery in your fob is for remote activation of the onboard RFID device only and all security mentioned above is done. 
This is a very very simplified and slightly generalized explanation, there are tons more involved like AB rising and falling detection in randomization.  Also your RFID tag can report multiple different ID numbers depending on the polling signal's challenge code, challnge power level, challenge frequency(both band and specific frequency) and encryption type.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #156 on: September 23, 2022, 06:46:23 PM »
Nevermind. I see where they are saying the car wouldn't even be able to start if the key battery died. I guess that kind of indicates they think there couldn't be a passive RFID thing going on.

Edit: clarification. Also, disclaimer, I'm not in any way an RFID nerd (I know you know that already Mikey T, but just to make sure no one makes the mistake of thinking I'm trying to speak from a place of strong foundational knowledge... I've just built the Pi keyfob repeater before), I know precious little about the tech beyond very broad strokes.
No worries brother,
I have had way too much to drink today or I would have written pages.  I live in that world and have designed a few RFID systems.  Sone that had the tag going into ovens and having to deal with the degradation that extra energy does to passive tags.  I had to study too much during troubleshooting that shit show of a project.  I fucked up on the front end but corrected it with new ceramic embedded tags and increased polling rates with some homebrew error correction for the extra garbage numbers that may be transmitted. 

?

Themightykabool

  • 13099
  • +58/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #157 on: September 24, 2022, 08:07:40 AM »
What you are trying to justify is state takeover of auto commerce. You have to buy the cars the government wants because they've called all others obsolete.


This is amazing
So close to understanding yet so far away.



How would you bulmba feel if the state took your tax dollars to subsidized a comodity utility that 99% people require to live.
Then the producer could reap profits while holding said monopoly, without any of the environmental clean required, pushing clean costs back on you the tax payer?

Then using their enormous profits to buy politicians who will go to war with your life, to destablize competing producers.

And use those profits to squash new competing prodcuts?

How would you feel about that?
Sounds like you dont like it.




So we re in agreement
Planned obscelence of electronic equipment and monopoly of resources are bad.
Down with monopolies!
« Last Edit: September 24, 2022, 08:23:16 AM by Themightykabool »

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-34
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #158 on: September 24, 2022, 09:20:12 AM »
I dislike lumping together all RFID and acting like it is the same.

That would be like saying all keys are keys, treating a key which literally just turns a lock the same as one with security pins.

Yes, all can be bypassed, that applies for literally everything. But some are trivial, and some are incredibly complex and unlikely to be defeated with current devices in any reasonable period of time. i.e. it would be easier to hack the ECU.

Using locks is probably not the best analogy.  See TheLockPickingLawyer on youtube.

But I'll give you your point and agree that the average joe isn't going to be able to just pick up the equipment and defeat security protocols for RFID from the start.  Experience will matter, but the tools to do so are out there and not difficult to attain and use.  Just like picking a lock, while it certainly can be done and the tools are readily available, not everyone will be able to do it with ease from the start.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2022, 09:21:50 AM by NotSoSkeptical »
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #159 on: September 24, 2022, 03:09:46 PM »
Using locks is probably not the best analogy.  See TheLockPickingLawyer on youtube.

But I'll give you your point and agree that the average joe isn't going to be able to just pick up the equipment and defeat security protocols for RFID from the start.  Experience will matter, but the tools to do so are out there and not difficult to attain and use.  Just like picking a lock, while it certainly can be done and the tools are readily available, not everyone will be able to do it with ease from the start.
I think the lockpickinglawyer can make it a great example. Some locks you can defeat with almost anything. Including just directly turning the locking lug with no picking needed at all. Others are much harder to defeat.

But with RFID, I'm not sure if we do have the tools available to defeat them all, at least not in any reasonable time period.
And that includes keyless ignition, which should be a challenge-response setup.

(and likewise, with some locks, there are some with traps that mean unless you know what to expect, you will brick the lock if you try picking it and fail, and that would prevent even brute force.)

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #160 on: September 24, 2022, 06:10:25 PM »
I have no idea what tech these guys used and it's from 2019 so a little old...


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #161 on: September 24, 2022, 07:19:55 PM »
I have no idea what tech these guys used and it's from 2019 so a little old...



They appear to have used a repeater, with the FOB close enough to the wall, and that is why the guy went up to the house.
Basically they pick up the signal from the car, repeat it with more power to get through the wall and into the house to communicate with the FOB, pick up the signal back from the fob and then send it to the car to trick the car into thinking the key is nearby/inside.

This is made more problematic by the combination of keyless "ignition" and proximity entry.
By a simple relay attack they are able to unlock the car, and then get in and start it.
If it required pushing a button on the fob to unlock the car, it wouldn't have gone down as smoothly.

It could also be prevented by storing the FOB in a RF protective pouch.

And depending on the cars software, once the FOB is out of range (and not being repeated) it will either stop, or it just wont start after it stops.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #162 on: September 24, 2022, 08:26:24 PM »
I have no idea what tech these guys used and it's from 2019 so a little old...



They appear to have used a repeater, with the FOB close enough to the wall, and that is why the guy went up to the house.
Basically they pick up the signal from the car, repeat it with more power to get through the wall and into the house to communicate with the FOB, pick up the signal back from the fob and then send it to the car to trick the car into thinking the key is nearby/inside.

This is made more problematic by the combination of keyless "ignition" and proximity entry.
By a simple relay attack they are able to unlock the car, and then get in and start it.
If it required pushing a button on the fob to unlock the car, it wouldn't have gone down as smoothly.

It could also be prevented by storing the FOB in a RF protective pouch.

And depending on the cars software, once the FOB is out of range (and not being repeated) it will either stop, or it just wont start after it stops.
So they used the backpack thing to challenge the fob in the house to make its return signal seem like it was next to the car to unlock and then enable the push button.  Interesting.  I hadn't thought of that.  I guess they had to know enough about the style of fob for that specific car type to ensure they could properly capture the ID of the fob and be able to copy it so they car didn't shut start alarming after it got far enough away from the fob to defeat the constant presence portion.  Granted that's mainly an annoying beep in the car and inability to put it back in gear if they stopped somewhere. 
Interesting.  Pretty sofististicated rig.  It could be why newer cars have a bit more randomness in their frequency and individual bit timings now.  But hey, no matter how hard you make the lock, as long as there is enough incentive, someone will do their best to defeat it.  I would assume the level of sofistication and research needed would soon out cost the cars stripped down value.

My wife's car will let you unlock k it by pressing a button on the door handle if the fob is close enough, this one must be the same.

They had to know a good but about the victim.  Where in the house the key would have been, some specific info about the car, I guess you may be able to get it with the right contacts and the VIN.  Was this a repo by chance? 
« Last Edit: September 24, 2022, 08:30:50 PM by Mikey T. »

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #163 on: September 24, 2022, 11:27:58 PM »
So they used the backpack thing to challenge the fob in the house to make its return signal seem like it was next to the car to unlock and then enable the push button.  Interesting.  I hadn't thought of that.  I guess they had to know enough about the style of fob for that specific car type to ensure they could properly capture the ID of the fob and be able to copy it so they car didn't shut start alarming after it got far enough away from the fob to defeat the constant presence portion.  Granted that's mainly an annoying beep in the car and inability to put it back in gear if they stopped somewhere. 
Interesting.  Pretty sofististicated rig.  It could be why newer cars have a bit more randomness in their frequency and individual bit timings now.  But hey, no matter how hard you make the lock, as long as there is enough incentive, someone will do their best to defeat it.  I would assume the level of sofistication and research needed would soon out cost the cars stripped down value.

My wife's car will let you unlock k it by pressing a button on the door handle if the fob is close enough, this one must be the same.

They had to know a good but about the victim.  Where in the house the key would have been, some specific info about the car, I guess you may be able to get it with the right contacts and the VIN.  Was this a repo by chance?
I think the warning is just for those inside the vehicle.
It appears it is more to prevent people accidentally driving off without their fob and not being able to start it later rather than preventing theft.
And some early models didn't even have a warning.

So I doubt they copied the ID.

The bigger issue is the GPS tracking of the car.
I assume if it was done properly it would be driven directly to a garage where it would be stripped for parts.

Also, the cost needs to be higher than the car is the time required.
If you spend $300k researching how to steal the car, but can get $30k for each car stolen, you just need to steal 10 cars to break even (ignoring time).
And if you distribute the information so others get it cheaply, it can be profitable for them immediately.
Similarly, if the hardware required to steal it is expensive, as long as it isn't single use it can be profitable.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #164 on: September 25, 2022, 09:36:21 AM »
So they used the backpack thing to challenge the fob in the house to make its return signal seem like it was next to the car to unlock and then enable the push button.  Interesting.  I hadn't thought of that.  I guess they had to know enough about the style of fob for that specific car type to ensure they could properly capture the ID of the fob and be able to copy it so they car didn't shut start alarming after it got far enough away from the fob to defeat the constant presence portion.  Granted that's mainly an annoying beep in the car and inability to put it back in gear if they stopped somewhere. 
Interesting.  Pretty sofististicated rig.  It could be why newer cars have a bit more randomness in their frequency and individual bit timings now.  But hey, no matter how hard you make the lock, as long as there is enough incentive, someone will do their best to defeat it.  I would assume the level of sofistication and research needed would soon out cost the cars stripped down value.

My wife's car will let you unlock k it by pressing a button on the door handle if the fob is close enough, this one must be the same.

They had to know a good but about the victim.  Where in the house the key would have been, some specific info about the car, I guess you may be able to get it with the right contacts and the VIN.  Was this a repo by chance?
I think the warning is just for those inside the vehicle.
It appears it is more to prevent people accidentally driving off without their fob and not being able to start it later rather than preventing theft.
And some early models didn't even have a warning.

So I doubt they copied the ID.

The bigger issue is the GPS tracking of the car.
I assume if it was done properly it would be driven directly to a garage where it would be stripped for parts.

Also, the cost needs to be higher than the car is the time required.
If you spend $300k researching how to steal the car, but can get $30k for each car stolen, you just need to steal 10 cars to break even (ignoring time).
And if you distribute the information so others get it cheaply, it can be profitable for them immediately.
Similarly, if the hardware required to steal it is expensive, as long as it isn't single use it can be profitable.
That's fair.  Still dependant on knowledge of the victim and their habits.  Hence, don't hang your cars keys on the wall by your front door.  Mine usually stay either on me or in my office which is on the opposite side of the house from my vehicle.  This technique probably wouldn't work for my vehicle, but I'm not rocking a 90 k tesla either, so yeah, my POS expedition wouldn't be worth the trouble anyway.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #165 on: September 25, 2022, 09:47:00 AM »
Wait, how did we get here?  I just noticed this thread was about the supposed Antarctic ice wall. 

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #166 on: September 25, 2022, 12:07:27 PM »
Wait, how did we get here?  I just noticed this thread was about the supposed Antarctic ice wall.

That got boring because it's such an inane archaic topic - Pretty much the dumbest FE assertion ever. So we took the obvious next logical leap and started talking about RFID cracking to steal Teslas. Jesus Mikey, try and keep up.  ;)

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #167 on: September 25, 2022, 02:05:39 PM »
Wait, how did we get here?  I just noticed this thread was about the supposed Antarctic ice wall.

That got boring because it's such an inane archaic topic - Pretty much the dumbest FE assertion ever. So we took the obvious next logical leap and started talking about RFID cracking to steal Teslas. Jesus Mikey, try and keep up.  ;)
Fair, you win this round Stash.  Lmao.

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 6116
  • +61/-72
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #168 on: September 25, 2022, 06:30:10 PM »
General statements get general answers.

RFID is RFID, regardless of what it's being utilized with.

RFID skimming is most commonly referenced to credit/debit card skimming; however, RFID skimming is simply the malicious reading and copying of the information contained within the RFID tag remotely.

RFID can be read using over the counter equipment.

While certain RFID setups can utilize additional countermeasures to make it harder to read and duplicate as you stated, that's not always the case, nor are those countermeasures impervious.  It just makes reading and duplication more difficult.

Ugh, I just saw this awful commercial where this guy refuses to take cash, instead getting pure digital money because he's too much of a fucker to trust legal tender. You do know that in your phobia about germs on paper money (this cashless craze took off during COVID), you've opened yourself up to the same sorta signal hacking? Cash can't be hacked. You have to actually know your mugger, most times.



Most awkward commercial ever. Dude, take the freaking cash.

Quote
That got boring because it's such an inane archaic topic - Pretty much the dumbest FE assertion ever. So we took the obvious next logical leap and started talking about RFID cracking to steal Teslas. Jesus Mikey, try and keep up. 

I got bored with it too. But why would you want to steal a Tesla? Electric cars freaking blow up on you.





Yes, gas cars can catch fire, but it seems not to be a problem if you take normal care of it, versus an inherent issue.
If ρ=m/V, then B=ρsurfobj


Here's my Bible, if ya wanna read

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #169 on: September 25, 2022, 07:18:49 PM »
General statements get general answers.

RFID is RFID, regardless of what it's being utilized with.

RFID skimming is most commonly referenced to credit/debit card skimming; however, RFID skimming is simply the malicious reading and copying of the information contained within the RFID tag remotely.

RFID can be read using over the counter equipment.

While certain RFID setups can utilize additional countermeasures to make it harder to read and duplicate as you stated, that's not always the case, nor are those countermeasures impervious.  It just makes reading and duplication more difficult.

Ugh, I just saw this awful commercial where this guy refuses to take cash, instead getting pure digital money because he's too much of a fucker to trust legal tender. You do know that in your phobia about germs on paper money (this cashless craze took off during COVID), you've opened yourself up to the same sorta signal hacking? Cash can't be hacked. You have to actually know your mugger, most times.



Most awkward commercial ever. Dude, take the freaking cash.

Quote
That got boring because it's such an inane archaic topic - Pretty much the dumbest FE assertion ever. So we took the obvious next logical leap and started talking about RFID cracking to steal Teslas. Jesus Mikey, try and keep up. 

I got bored with it too. But why would you want to steal a Tesla? Electric cars freaking blow up on you.





Yes, gas cars can catch fire, but it seems not to be a problem if you take normal care of it, versus an inherent issue.
Are you serious? 

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 6116
  • +61/-72
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #170 on: September 25, 2022, 07:34:45 PM »
I'm serious as a car fire.
If ρ=m/V, then B=ρsurfobj


Here's my Bible, if ya wanna read

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #171 on: September 25, 2022, 08:13:54 PM »
Wow, a car caught fire in China! Oh the humanity!!!!

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • +1/-3
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #172 on: September 26, 2022, 12:25:42 AM »
I'm serious as a car fire.
Gasoline cars catch a light all the time. It just does not make the news, because its so frequent.

But your going to have to start making peace with electric cars sooner or later, as they are dominating the new car market at a very rapid pace.
Probably very few new gasoline cars after 2030 - 2035.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • +1/-3
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #173 on: September 26, 2022, 01:01:26 AM »
Concerning the chance of EV's catching fire.
https://www.kbb.com/car-news/study-electric-vehicles-involved-in-fewest-car-fires/

Quote

Hybrid-powered cars were involved in about 3,475 fires per every 100,000 sold.
Gasoline-powered cars, about 1,530 per 100,000 sold
Electric vehicles (EVs) saw just 25 fires per 100,000 sold.

So an electric car is about 61 times less likely to catch fire than a gasoline car.
Who ever tells you that electric cars are dangerous because the catch fire has an agenda

If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

?

Themightykabool

  • 13099
  • +58/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #174 on: September 26, 2022, 06:00:07 AM »
Kindle AND a computer?
Now whos an elitist?

Side note
Is your kindle plugged in all the time or do you orefer it to be battery powered?





Now if you'll excuse me, I'm goung to draw what is happening in this rocket thing, so I gotta switch from Kindle to my computer.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-34
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 6116
  • +61/-72
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #177 on: September 26, 2022, 11:40:11 AM »
I'm serious as a car fire.
Gasoline cars catch a light all the time. It just does not make the news, because its so frequent.

But you're going to have to start making peace with electric cars sooner or later, as they are dominating the new car market at a very rapid pace.
Probably very few new gasoline cars after 2030 - 2035.

Yeah right. Because it's so often that you see cars doing this when they have proper coolant and oil. All it takes for a electric car to burn is to get too much charge and the battery to overheat.

https://www.jordantimes.com/news/local/exploding-car-gasoline-tank%E2%80%99-during-heat-myth-experts-say
Quote
But fuel and auto experts said the “exploding gasoline tank” is a myth.

Never tell me "You gonna have to switch to (this or that technology)  anyway," those are the words of a tyrant. And they're often not true. "Everyone is going to have to use punch cards eventually." Until they basically went obsolete, and data was processed some other way. They're telling my nephew that everyone will use some programming method, and getting him to learn it at age eight or nine. What do you think the odds are that this code will still be the big thing when he is an adult? I'd say about 5%.

As for EVs, actual car manufacturers are rejecting them.
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/toyota-actively-lobbying-to-slow-down-ev-revolution/
So are customers.

The only way that such technology is "inevitable" would be if we have a tyranny, and it is quite literally forced down our throats. And tyrannies have a nasty habit of falling. 

Here's what we know of EVs from history.
https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-electric-car
Quote
Here in the U.S., the first successful electric car made its debut around 1890 thanks to William Morrison, a chemist who lived in Des Moines, Iowa. His six-passenger vehicle capable of a top speed of 14 miles per hour was little more than an electrified wagon, but it helped spark interest in electric vehicles.

Quote
The early rise and fall of the electric car

To understand the popularity of electric vehicles circa 1900, it is also important to understand the development of the personal vehicle and the other options available. At the turn of the 20th century, the horse was still the primary mode of transportation. But as Americans became more prosperous, they turned to the newly invented motor vehicle -- available in steam, gasoline or electric versions -- to get around.

Steam was a tried and true energy source, having proved reliable for powering factories and trains. Some of the first self-propelled vehicles in the late 1700s relied on steam; yet it took until the 1870s for the technology to take hold in cars. Part of this is because steam wasn’t very practical for personal vehicles. Steam vehicles required long startup times -- sometimes up to 45 minutes in the cold -- and would need to be refilled with water, limiting their range.

As electric vehicles came onto the market, so did a new type of vehicle -- the gasoline-powered car -- thanks to improvements to the internal combustion engine in the 1800s. While gasoline cars had promise, they weren’t without their faults. They required a lot of manual effort to drive -- changing gears was no easy task and they needed to be started with a hand crank, making them difficult for some to operate. They were also noisy, and their exhaust was unpleasant.

Electric cars didn’t have any of the issues associated with steam or gasoline. They were quiet, easy to drive and didn’t emit a smelly pollutant like the other cars of the time. Electric cars quickly became popular with urban residents -- especially women. They were perfect for short trips around the city, and poor road conditions outside cities meant few cars of any type could venture farther. As more people gained access to electricity in the 1910s, it became easier to charge electric cars, adding to their popularity with all walks of life (including some of the “best known and prominent makers of gasoline cars” as a 1911 New York Times article pointed out).

Many innovators at the time took note of the electric vehicle’s high demand, exploring ways to improve the technology. For example, Ferdinand Porsche, founder of the sports car company by the same name, developed an electric car called the P1
in 1898. Around the same time, he created the world’s first hybrid electric car -- a vehicle that is powered by electricity and a gas engine. Thomas Edison, one of the world’s most prolific inventors, thought electric vehicles were the superior technology and worked to build a better electric vehicle battery. Even Henry Ford, who was friends with Edison, partnered with Edison to explore options for a low-cost electric car in 1914, according to Wired.

Yet, it was Henry Ford’s mass-produced Model T that dealt a blow to the electric car. Introduced in 1908, the Model T made gasoline-powered cars widely available and affordable. By 1912, the gasoline car cost only $650, while an electric roadster sold for $1,750. That same year, Charles Kettering introduced the electric starter, eliminating the need for the hand crank and giving rise to more gasoline-powered vehicle sales.

Other developments also contributed to the decline of the electric vehicle. By the 1920s, the U.S. had a better system of roads connecting cities, and Americans wanted to get out and explore. With the discovery of Texas crude oil, gas became cheap and readily available for rural Americans, and filling stations began popping up across the country. In comparison, very few Americans outside of cities had electricity at that time. In the end, electric vehicles all but disappeared by 1935.

This article has an overly rosy picture of electric vehicles, so let's point out the key part of all this.

Quote
Electric cars quickly became popular with urban residents -- especially women. They were perfect for short trips around the city, and poor road conditions outside cities meant few cars of any type could venture farther.

The electric cars of back then were structurally identical to the golf carts of today. Okay for short trips around town.

This is like saying that you use your computer just for email and Facebook. Like, you don't even have the technical ability to use Paint and Word. That sort of person would be fine with an iPod or something. But here's the thing. They can't possibly justify the price of an iPod for casual use. Same here. Get a cheap used car, not a $40,000 luxury hobby car. Or do get one, I don't care (though if you ask me, if you're only driving short distances, it's completely impractical), but don't tell me what I should be able to drive.

That you have the absolute nerve to tell other people what they can and cannot drive... Nuhh, sod off.

I use a Kindle because unlike a "smartphone" it doesn't constantly charge me for minutes every month. I don't wanna call anyone, and I don't want anyone to call me. So paying $60+ a month for some plan (read: $720 a year, and $7200 over ten years) is not cool. I don't even have $7200. It was a birthday present, and I get a fair amount of use for it. What's so elitist about that? The average Kindle is about $115 or so. The average iDevice approaches $1000, and it is probably completely unsellable due to the phone contract.

Quote
Hybrid-powered cars were involved in about 3,475 fires per every 100,000 sold.
Gasoline-powered cars, about 1,530 per 100,000 sold
Electric vehicles (EVs) saw just 25 fires per 100,000 sold.

Someone just showed me the potential of electrical fires.

Also, if hybrids are 3 times as likely to burn, doesn't that mean some component in hybrids accounts for the other 2/3? Gas is common to both, so why don't the gas burn more often than the hybrids?
That we only have 25 fires, isn't it more likely that this statistic is based on incomplete info? Like that on average, people don't buy electric vehicles enough for them to sell 100,000?

More likely your statistician has an axe to grind.

From the Electric Madness article.
Quote
To suggest, as some ignorant people have, that electric cars ‘emit no CO 2’ is
absurd because the power stations that charge them do. To charge an electric
vehicle (such as a Tesla), just once, requires the burning of 43 kilogram of coal. A
petrol car will require about 20 kilogram of petrol for the same distance. It
follows that the electric car is emitting more than twice the CO2 of a petrol car.

Here are the sums:
Drax uses about 0.31 kilogram of coal per KWhr generated.*
A Tesla battery is rated at 70 KWhr and fast charging is only 50%
efficient. It will need 140 KWhr of electricity for a single charge; this works out
as about 43 kilogram (0.31 × 140) of coal for a full charge.
The cost of electricity for the range available in a Tesla—200 miles in
summer; 100 miles in winter—works out at £22.50. The petrol for 200 miles
costs very little more and most of that cost is tax (currently about 60%) - about
£28. In winter, for 100 miles, the petrol costs just £15.

During trials between 1927-30 of British steam locomotives a typical result was that, for a 500
ton express train, coal was consumed at the rate of 20 kg per mile.† Over 200 miles therefore
4000 kg was consumed. Scaling down to a 2 ton car: 4000÷250 = 16 kg coal. Even allowing for
economies of scale, compare this to the 43 kg required by a Tesla.

Further issues
• Battery cycling - the deterioration of the capacity of a lithium battery with
charging - must be allowed for costing about £3 per cycle.‡
• Fire: even small lithium batteries are liable to catch fire or even explode. The
huge dangers for occupants in event of an accident are obvious. Firehoses would
only exacerbate the problem, causing electrocution of victims (A gas fire, even if it did happen as often as you say, would be able to be snuffed, whereas electric cars are a nuisance to put out)

* www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/f/fuelcomparison.htm ; figures from Greenpeace are higher: 0.7
kg/KWhr www.energydesk.greenpeace.org/2013/02/14/much-coal-burning-will-keep-burning/).
Windturbines take 25 years to pay off their CO2 debt (concrete, metal mining and refining etc). They seldom
last more than ten years.
† The British Steam Locomotive 1925-1965 by O.S.Nock, Ian Allan 1966. p67 Dynamometer Car Tests 1927
on LMSR Engine Royal Scot No. 6100.
‡ Incidentally, battery ‘swopping’ is unviable. An average garage refuels 1000 cars a day; how are they going
to recharge 1000 batteries every day @ 5-12 hours each?

The Tesla battery weighs 800kg—that’s nearly a ton—equivalent to 10 people.
Battery/petrol equivalent weight ratio—in summer 50:1, in winter 100:1.

In winter, in severe conditions, electric cars become death traps. Firstly, the
battery power halves every ten degree drop in temperature, so you are likely to
get stuck in a snowstorm. Then there will be no heating in the car and a blizzard
outside. You will freeze to death inside and, outside the car, you’ll die seeking
help. This would not happen in a petrol car. A petrol car’s engine remains at full
power down to the last drop of petrol and has plenty of heating
. The electric car
loses power almost immediately as the battery drains—and has no heating.
As most of the numpties, who think electric cars are viable, live in towns
the above point doubtless passes them by, but the huge potential for traffic
clogging due to ‘dead’ electric vehicles has not been considered*, nor has the
issue of time to recharge. Currently an average petrol car takes about 5 minutes
to fill up with petrol and depart. If an electric car takes a minimum of 75 minutes
to recharge, the queues are going to be astronomical and the time wasted also
astronomical.

* One type of electric car is called a Leaf. This will give a wholly new meaning to ‘leaves on the road’!

The BBC tried to take an electric car from London to Edinburgh. It took more
than three days, slower than a stagecoach
. Strangely, people sometimes need to
get to places quickly.

In case anyone thinks that there is a miracle battery just over the horizon,
I can absolutely assure him or her that there is not. Battery technology is mature,
and, to quote Mr John Hume, “Miracles do not happen.” (at least in technology).

The Climate Change Act requires that by 2050 all gas heating be replaced by
electric heating and all cars be electric. Besides the stupidity of turning huge
amounts of electricity back into heat, clearly no one in government has done the
maths. The results are horrendous!

43 kilogram (0.31 × 140) of coal for a full charge. For one car.

And in winter, you freeze to death because car efficiency goes down since it tries to save power.

Quote
That's that 50Hz power for you.

And how many Hz does a EV run on? It's gotta be more than a Kindle.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2022, 11:48:02 AM by bulmabriefs144 »
If ρ=m/V, then B=ρsurfobj


Here's my Bible, if ya wanna read

?

Themightykabool

  • 13099
  • +58/-79
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #178 on: September 26, 2022, 12:24:46 PM »
do people in florida often have a freezing problem?
what about californians?
mexicans?
australians (if they exist)?

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 6116
  • +61/-72
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Antarctica - A wall of ice?
« Reply #179 on: September 26, 2022, 12:51:19 PM »
I see. So Mexicans don't count.

It does snow in Florida, Mexico, and California. Just less often. I was in Arizona, and I got like 2 inches of snow.

Meanwhile, hot weather also causes the electricity to strain.

In a gas car, you can run the heater or A/C because a small amount of electricity is set aside by the alternator. Up to the point where the car don't go no mo, you are able to pull the car's weight and heat/cool the car.

An electric car, however, is pulling a 800kg battery along (I checked the average gas car engine weighs between 140 to 320 kg). Even at a high engine estimate, this battery is nearly 3 times the weight, with it being as much as 7 times the weight. This represents alot of strain as the car tries to pull itself. How much strain? Well, ironically, one area that probably should switch from gas to electric is rocket packs. This is because the weight of the fuel means that the technology has never been able to "take off", so to speak. The pack has to push up against its own weight, using large quantities of fuel. It can only do so for a few minutes, making it impractical. You can increase the capacity, but the problem only worsens.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/sep/23/jetpacks-science-scientists
Quote
At present, the most practical fuel sources we have are chemical. Jet fuel and rocket fuel are both made using highly reactive chemicals, which have physical mass that has to be accounted for. The more energy you need, the more fuel you need for your flying vehicle. The more fuel you need, the more your vehicle weighs. The more it weighs, the more energy is needed to move it, and thus a vicious cycle occurs (which is also an appropriate term for pedal-powered flight).

The same dynamic here. A big heavy freight of a battery is used trying to pretend that electric cars are something more than hobby golf carts for resort towns. Add this to a drive through Arizona or California during the height of summer, and you have a recipe to get heatstroke and die. But congratulations, everyone demanding we make this shift has literal blood on their hands.

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/renewable-energy/electric-vehicles-have-a-dark-side-too-blood-batteries-and-child-labour-82567

In fact, let's discuss blood batteries. Every lb or so of cobalt, a kid in China or DRC gets to work to death for a lousy buck. If even that.

Quote
Since the age of nine, John had worked as a human mule, carrying bags after bags of cobalt for just $0.75 a day. During a work day, John fell into a tunnel.

He was dragged out by fellow workers. But John was left alone on the ground, and when his parents discovered the accident, they rushed to the mining site, but it was too late. The doctors say John will never be able to walk again because he is paralysed.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2022, 01:09:26 PM by bulmabriefs144 »
If ρ=m/V, then B=ρsurfobj


Here's my Bible, if ya wanna read