Rons said:So this article was at the of my news feed
https://slate.com/technology/2022/05/electric-vehicles-level-1-chargers-policy.html
I’ll through in add some solar on top of the mall, add some carports that include solar panels, I get lots of ads for those. All of a sudden generation and distribution aren’t such a big problem - oh other than big energy doesn’t get to be a middleman.
Solar and wind generators. Wind blowing at night can charge those EV's in everyone's garage.
Here's some information on what the local power company is doing for EV adoption: https://portlandgeneral.com/energy-choices/electric-vehicles-charging
We've got a pretty good mix of generation here, and are very lucky to have a E36 M3ton of hydro power. The Columbia River doesn't stop flowing at night 
In reply to tuna55 :
n reply to Boost_Crazy :
I didn't miss it, it simply is largely unimportant. Some tiny fraction of the drivers out there will be destination charging at all, the vast majority will charge at night when the rest of the grid isn't doing hardly anything. The data on this board from real people completely supports this.
I'm pretty much done explaining this to you, though. Check back with me in ten years and we'll check on the disruptions to the grid based on EV adoption. Neither of us have any say in policy other than I've purchased an EVwhich I regularly charge and you have not.
You have explained nothing. You live in a bubble that you have extrapolated to the rest of us while ignoring fact. You are part of the less than 1% minority right now, most of which is clustered in a few areas of the country. As I have said numerous times, infrastructure needs to grow with or ahead of EV adoption, and plans are in place. So in ten years, I expect BOTH EV adoption to grow as well as the infrastructure to support it. I don't understand why that is such a hard concept to grasp. Look around you, there are a limited number of EV destination chargers sprouting up all around, just to cater to you less than 1%- who you claim to speak for and say doesn't need it. When regular people adopt EV's, you don't see that need increasing? Those that make policy, make car chargers (I've met with multiple manufactures,) make electrical distribution equipment (met with them,) disagree.
What is your argument anyway? We can move to EV's with minimal change to the infrastructure simply by charging from home? What data did you use to reach this conclusion? Just your anecdotal evidence from your experience as an early adopter? Worked for you, so we have your green light to scale it up as is? Should I tell all of the electrical engineers that are currently drawing up plans that tuna55 said we will be just fine?
Today, EV's are at the point where they make financial sense for many- maybe even most- people. Yet the take rate is real low. Billions of dollars are being invested- outside of the cars themselves- to increase that take rate. Maybe they should just hire you spread the word that home charging is all they need. Plug in as many cars as you want in your neighborhood. What difference could that possibly make? I heard the older the neighborhood, the better. Those old houses had small electrical services, so there should be plenty of juice left over. No need for any math or engineering nonsense, it will be fine. Tuna said so. He used to work in power generation, which is close enough to distribution.
You are right, I haven't purchased an EV. To be honest, I'm interested, but the operating expense would go up vs. my current ICE daily driver. It has a neat feature called a gas and maintenance card. I also don't have much say, since my company provides it. They are not about wasting money, so at some point I'd expect the to switch me over to an EV. Actually, they they are working on it now, I almost forgot. I wasn't eligible because I cover too large an area and they don't want we standing around waiting for my car to charge. My wife was eligible. They were going to give her a Bolt I believe? And pay to install a charger at our house. She declined because she likes her new Telluride and it's our family vehicle. She would have taken an EV more equivalent to her Telluride, which doesn't exist yet. So a free Bolt wouldn't work for my use, and my wife didn't want a free Bolt (she gets a healthy amount towards her Telluride instead.) How is that for a couple contrary data points to your example? Now a Lighting might be in the mix in the future.
One factor I don't recall seeing in this thread is ,how much does it take to produce those batteries. I'm talking from the mining of the raw materials to the actual production. I recall seeing an article a while back that made a strong case that EV's weren't that environmentally friendly at this point with the technology and infrastructure today. TINSNAFL, those batteries don't appear as if by magic with no environmental impact. Just another aspect to consider with things as they are now. I am not saying EV's a not needed or are bad, but the existing technology has a way to go to be a positive impact environmentally.
In reply to Don49 (Forum Supporter) :
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth5
In their estimates, while GHGs from EV manufacturing are higher (shown in blue below), total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
The gasoline infrastructure was built up over time, but we also have time to build up the electrical infrastructure. Even if every vehicle sold from today forward was an EV, the fleet only turns over at a couple of percent per year. It would take a long time to get to 25% EV and I'm not sure we could actually get to 99% in my lifetime unless there's a Cash For Oil Burners program.
The good news is that we know how to do what needs to be done, there's no wait for some sort of technology to come out of the lab. If I was counseling a high schooler as to what trade to enter, I'd probably recommend electrician over mechanic at this point :)
It's really not a complicated issue, just one that we need to be aware of and plan for. I ran across this graphical presentation of what different EV adoption rates might look like. I don't know how accurate the numbers are, but the scenarios seem reasonable...
You aren't kidding on the electricians. I work with dozens of contractors, and their number one concern is where are they going to find enough electricians in the future. And by future I mean next Tuesday.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
Carefully reading your posts I think you and I have the same problem. You try to answer everyone and that leads to some confusion. Then "some" kinda jump on you and you try to explain yourself.
It's easy to take subjects and twist them a bit to have a person come off wrong.
Don't worry, I think your heart is in the right spot. Most people on this site will eventually see that.
Don49 (Forum Supporter) said:One factor I don't recall seeing in this thread is ,how much does it take to produce those batteries. I'm talking from the mining of the raw materials to the actual production. I recall seeing an article a while back that made a strong case that EV's weren't that environmentally friendly at this point with the technology and infrastructure today. TINSNAFL, those batteries don't appear as if by magic with no environmental impact. Just another aspect to consider with things as they are now. I am not saying EV's a not needed or are bad, but the existing technology has a way to go to be a positive impact environmentally.
I read that same post. Trying not to forget all I know about mining. We have Iron Ranges here in Minnesota. It's one of our big export products.
Mines are not pretty places. And absolutely they pollute. But without them things come to a grinding halt.
Old mines that failed to produce were just left and turned back into forest land. Some are pretty, some are just trashy. But there is plenty of nice land up in that area. Nope I don't think the land has fully recovered but it's heading that way.
So accept the mining as a cost of doing business. Better, I think for the planet than pulling up oil. But not perfect. At least they aren't like decaying cities.
By the way now that they are starting to recycle those batteries I do feel better.
Mining is dirty, but once the battery is made it lasts for years and then its impact comes from the way it's recharged which can be a variety of sources.
The most green thing we can do is stop schlepping people all over the place. There's no zero-impact way to move all that meat around.
But as for the metals in batteries, that's one of the reason that Tesla (and possibly others) are starting to use Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) in some models. Apparently a quarter of Q1 2022 Tesla production used these batteries, mostly in China and purely in "standard range" models. They've got some advantages and disadvantages (cheaper, safer, less energy density) over the Nickel Cobalt Aluminum (NCA) chemistry used in the rest, but one of the big ones is that they don't contain nickel or cobalt.
Can a large number of evs plugged in help with brown outs? I know the ford lightning can be used as a generator, so would a large number of them plugged in act as a capacitor to reduce strain when everyone's AC units come on in the summer?
I still think there are better ways to reduce carbon output then to force ice out of existence like some seem to want. Evs are very good for urban use & anything that would spend a long time idling though. I just hope they can coexist with gas engines
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Another important but oft-overlooked benefit of EVs over ICE vehicles is where the emissions are made, particularly of things directly harmful to humans like NOx and HC emissions, even if the net emissions are the same (which they aren't, the EV still wins there too).
An ICE vehicle emits those close to the populations whose health you're trying to protect - walking down the street you get to breathe that stuff in straight from the source.
Even if you're charging your EV from a coal-fired power plant, that plant is usually out in the middle of nowhere, not down near the ground in a population center, so the actual humans don't end up breathing the higher concentrations of nasty stuff.
Caperix said:Can a large number of evs plugged in help with brown outs? I know the ford lightning can be used as a generator, so would a large number of them plugged in act as a capacitor to reduce strain when everyone's AC units come on in the summer?
I still think there are better ways to reduce carbon output then to force ice out of existence like some seem to want. Evs are very good for urban use & anything that would spend a long time idling though. I just hope they can coexist with gas engines
As a serious ICE fan 6 is better than 4 8 is better than 6 and 12 is just starting to be fun. I love to play with those toys.
However for efficient daily transportation I'll take an EV. Fundamentally they are simple. No pistons starting and stopping no valves going up and down. No whirligigs to make the cams rotate or crankshafts con rods and best of all no transmissions.
A simple electric motor powered by a battery.
The average American Drives 31 miles a day. So he doesn't need 2-300 miles of range. 300 miles 5 days a week 52 weeks a year is 78,000 a year plus driving on the weekend?
He goes home plugs it in and sometime in the middle of the night it recharges for the 5 or six minutes it takes to be fully charged for the next day.
For that two weeks of vacation he'll charge at one of 100,000 or more fast charging stations all over the country the on board navigation system will find for him.While he eats a meal, goes to the bathroom, and washes his hands. 1/2 hour later he can drive for another 3-4 hours.
Matthew Kennedy said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
Another important but oft-overlooked benefit of EVs over ICE vehicles is where the emissions are made, particularly of things directly harmful to humans like NOx and HC emissions, even if the net emissions are the same (which they aren't, the EV still wins there too).
An ICE vehicle emits those close to the populations whose health you're trying to protect - walking down the street you get to breathe that stuff in straight from the source.
Even if you're charging your EV from a coal-fired power plant, that plant is usually out in the middle of nowhere, not down near the ground in a population center, so the actual humans don't end up breathing the higher concentrations of nasty stuff.
Plus those tall smoke stacks can be made cleaner burning with the addition of plates and filters.
Forgetting that many states have programs to provide free or reduced cost solar generators and Wind generators. As more and more of them come into use the cost gets lower and lower.
The advantage is less energy is lost via transmission. Surplus energy is sent to be consumed by your local neighbors rather than shipped hundreds of miles with attending transmission losses.
Tesla among others has new solar panels that are lower in price and promise increased life.
Wind generators with permanent magnets and better blades are generating in winds down as low as 4 mph.
From the article:
In Concord, Massachusetts, where Jacobs lives, his local utility has already asked that he set a timer on his electric vehicle so he is not charging until after 10 pm at night in exchange for a discounted rate.
"You're going to be plugged in all night anyhow, we'll give you a discount if you only charge after 10 pm". Now that's exactly how you deal with the "get home at 6pm and fire up the AC and plug in the EV" problem. It's built right into Teslas and probably others. Customers are happy because they save money, utilities are happy because they can spread the load around.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Is there a timer built into the cars? I am up @ 0345 and off to work at 4, I rarely see 10pm.
Also are the charge connections weatherproof? I do not really have a garage to park in at home.
I cannot speak for all EVs, but the Teslas certainly have a charging timer built in. Looking at the app, I have the choice between both scheduled charging and "off-peak charge". The latter lets me choose between all week and just weekdays along with details about when off-peak is. The Bolt has a charging scheduler built in as well from what I understand.
The charge connections are definitely waterproof, outdoor charging is considered normal.
Keith Tanner said:I cannot speak for all EVs, but the Teslas certainly have a charging timer built in. Looking at the app, I have the choice between both scheduled charging and "off-peak charge". The latter lets me choose between all week and just weekdays along with details about when off-peak is. The Bolt has a charging scheduler built in as well from what I understand.
The charge connections are definitely waterproof, outdoor charging is considered normal.
I must admit that I'm laughing a bit of the weatherproof idea, of course they're weatherproof. I charge outside exclusively. The Bolt, of course has scheduled charging, and most chargers do as well. My utility does not give a discount, but a voluntary program exists to give us a small reward if we charge off peak as well. Over the life of a 3-year agreement it's worth something like $500. There was a $500 incentive for signing up. Since the charging time is automated it's never been a problem anyway. The timer in the car even has a selection for different seasons because peak time means different things in different times of the year.
Keith Tanner said:From the article:
In Concord, Massachusetts, where Jacobs lives, his local utility has already asked that he set a timer on his electric vehicle so he is not charging until after 10 pm at night in exchange for a discounted rate.
"You're going to be plugged in all night anyhow, we'll give you a discount if you only charge after 10 pm". Now that's exactly how you deal with the "get home at 6pm and fire up the AC and plug in the EV" problem. It's built right into Teslas and probably others. Customers are happy because they save money, utilities are happy because they can spread the load around.
There are good mechanical reasons for this. It takes a lot of effort, in both time, man hours, and fuel to start up any power plant. Natural gas is faster than steam is faster than coal is faster than nuclear. Most of the time plants will simply idle during the evening instead of shutting off, unless they are built for quick start situations.
Is it legal to plug your own car in if you're in New Jersey, or do you have to have the attendant come over and hook you up each night?
racerfink said:
Interesting study, that really needed to be done (this is one case of course). The title of course refers to the manufacturing costs, but they do cover more relevant statistics, which is expected lifetime emissions:
Based on their findings, the petrol-powered Volvo XC40 produces around 58 tonnes of carbon dioxide, while the XC40 Recharge ICE ranges from 27 to 54 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, depending on the electricity source.
And
On the more balanced EU28 grid standard, the breakeven point happens at 77,248 km. And if you’re able to recharge the Volvo XC40 Recharge using only pure renewable energy, the breakeven point is just 48,280 km.
That's about 50,000 and 30,000 miles.
These stats of course do not include the tips required to have an attendant come over to you house and plug your car in in New Jersey and Oregon.
wae said:Is it legal to plug your own car in if you're in New Jersey, or do you have to have the attendant come over and hook you up each night?
Depends on whether or not the Electricians' union has gotten their way...
If we're talking about the impact of the electricity being used to recharge, EA is going to be 100% solar powered by 2023. That doesn't mean there will be panels at every charging stop, but that they're buying an equivalent amount of solar power.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/05/electrify-america-will-be-100-percent-solar-powered-by-2023/
Our own car is almost completely solar powered - the only time it's not drinking sunshine is when it's on a road trip. We're using the grid for storage.
You'll need to log in to post.
