Jump to content

Electric Vehicles Don’t Break The Grid, And They Can Help Boost It


RV_
 Share

Recommended Posts

One piece of misinformation being bandied around by the oil companies and folks that are behind the power curve in going EV keep repeating is that we don't have the grid, and EVs will crash it. It looks like just the opposite is true.

One disappointment is that Tesla still does not have bidirectional charging where it takes the place of a generator. And many are doing that called bi-directional charging. But all is not lost. I just called Rivian and was shocked to find they answered and I asked about bi-directional charging and Anna, the support rep told me that yes my Rivian R1T (https://rivian.com/r1t) we put on order in 2021 has bi-directional charging and will be able to run things in our house in an emergency or power outage and take part in distributed power generator networks which we saw coming a few years back. More on what that is below.

Lots of developments coming fast since the whole world is transitioning to EVs, some companies slower than others. So new tech and designs are coming so fast it is hard to keep up.

Excerpt:

“If everyone came home at the end of the day and plugged in their electric car to charge, the grid would fail.  We will all end up having to live like the Amish. Electric car drivers are just virtue signaling hypocrites as long as there is [insert any number here] fossil fuels powering the grid. The sky is falling,” exclaims Chicken Little. “So it is,” agrees Turkey Lurkey.

Australia has just come out of an energy crisis. Chicken Little and Turkey Lurkey blamed it on the amount of renewable energy in the grid and the number of EVs that were plugged in. It was of course caused by failing coal-fired power stations, compounded by the rise in gas prices due to the Russian war. But you should never miss a good opportunity to spread some FUD and make the weeds grow.

The answer is fairly simple. If every car in the USA, the UK, or Australia was electric, and they all plugged in their cars at the same time at peak hour, the grid definitely wouldn’t handle it. But people don’t do that. First of all, you don’t need to charge your car every day. We charge about 3 times a week. Second, it is more expensive to charge at peak hour. We charge in the evening when the electricity is cheaper. Many homeowners with solar panels charge in the middle of the day when there is excess power from their solar. According to Forbes, “The grids in most developed nations will be just fine, so long as the demand is properly management.” Then they do the maths to show you how it all works.

The greater likelihood is that electric vehicles will be used as power plants on wheels and support the grid. Linked by sophisticated software, they will be programmed to charge when electricity is cheap and discharge a predetermined amount (say 20%) back into the grid when power prices are high. (Related story: “Virtual Power Plants Do More Than Aggregate: They Empower.”)

Unfortunately, Tesla vehicles do not have this capacity yet. But many others do. EV batteries could take the place of expensive polluting gas peaker plants.

Another part of the answer is more efficient car design. A large percentage of the energy used to move any vehicle is expended in pushing air out of the way. Some electric cars are starting to look similar from the front, as designers go for minimal drag. Other carmakers, like Alfa Romeo, have vowed that they will keep their original design language (and pay the consequences). Cars currently entering the market are increasing efficiency by design and sometimes the inclusion of solar panels (see: Aptera and Sono Sion).

Fully Charged looked at the possibilities with the US grid here.

And the other issue? Like every other developed country, Australia’s electricity grid is moving rapidly into renewables. As I type up this article, in the middle of the day, Australia’s grid is receiving 50% of its electricity from wind, solar, and hydropower.

Virtue signaling? Or just better at doing the sums? As for Chicken Little and Turkey Lurkey? I guess they can always buy a horse — more environmentally friendly and what you shovel will make your flowers grow."

Much more in the original article here:

https://cleantechnica.com/2022/08/27/electric-vehicles-dont-break-the-grid-and-they-can-help-boost-it/

 

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read things like this and then I get curious. 

Quote

As I type up this article, in the middle of the day, Australia’s grid is receiving 50% of its electricity from wind, solar, and hydropower.

In the middle of the day? I am not sure what to make of that qualifier when the Australian government says:

Quote
  • Australia’s primary energy consumption is dominated by coal (around 40 per cent), oil (34 per cent) and gas (22 per cent). Coal accounts for about 75 per cent of Australia’s electricity generation, followed by gas (16 per cent), hydro (5 per cent) and wind around (2 per cent).

That only adds up to 98%, I am guessing solar accounts for that? I think the other thing that bothers me is the assumption that an EV can support the grid. That power had to come from somewhere in the first place. Ford has used something similar in ads for the Lightening and in an emergency it is an awesome capability. However, if that need goes on for very long the source (EV) is depleted and must recharge somewhere, somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Chalkie said:

I read things like this and then I get curious. 

In the middle of the day? I am not sure what to make of that qualifier when the Australian government says:

That only adds up to 98%, I am guessing solar accounts for that? I think the other thing that bothers me is the assumption that an EV can support the grid. That power had to come from somewhere in the first place. Ford has used something similar in ads for the Lightening and in an emergency it is an awesome capability. However, if that need goes on for very long the source (EV) is depleted and must recharge somewhere, somehow.

Rounding errors.  If each source was .25% higher than the published percentage it would round down to the next lower whole percent, and with 4 sources this would make up the missing 2%.

The problem with charging an electric car via solar is it has to be at the source of the solar power during the day.  If it's charging at home it's out of commission during that time, not good if you want to use it as a commute vehicle.  If you plan to recharge it at your workplace, that parking lot will require an awfully large solar array.  Otherwise you're relying on the same conventional power plants, running them longer each day to supply the needed power.   Guess what happens when you increase the duty cycle on a piece of machinery?  It breaks down or wears out sooner.   Maybe that's why Australia has "failing coal-fired power stations"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call BS on the article.  Where are they going to get this extra power to charge the cars every day during the peak use hours?  Are they going to only allow charging of EVs during off peak use hours?

Texas for one has issued brown out warning the past couple of years for people to reduce usage.  The have been both summer and winter load shedding and in some cases shutdown of the grid due to excessive demand.

I am sure Tesla will publish anything whether fully truthful or not to make them look like the good green giant.  The EV can grow into something good, but we have to get the infrastructure in place to handle the demand and also get the coal fired and natural gas fired plants replaced with a green energy source.

States in the west are already reducing output from the hydro-electric dams due to reduced water levels.  I guess Tesla has a magic plan to get the power grid up to the required levels and reduce the carbon fueled plants.  But we have yet to see a plan from anyone.

Ken

 

Edited by TXiceman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TXiceman said:

But we have yet to see a plan from anyone.

The plan I've seen is four parts.

1.  Shut down the manufacture of ICE vehicles

2.  Reduce the production of petroleum so that the price goes up enough to discourage people from buying it

3.  Provide cash incentives for people to buy EV's, solar power, and other efficient systems

4.  Hope everything else takes care of itself

The plan will probably work, but may be the most painful method of accomplishing the goal, especially to mid and lower income folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, durangodon said:

The plan I've seen is four parts.

1.  Shut down the manufacture of ICE vehicles

2.  Reduce the production of petroleum so that the price goes up enough to discourage people from buying it

3.  Provide cash incentives for people to buy EV's, solar power, and other efficient systems

4.  Hope everything else takes care of itself

The plan will probably work, but may be the most painful method of accomplishing the goal, especially to mid and lower income folks.

This is all political "pipe-dreams" and no foundation for getting it done.  Sure, a politician can listen to the "Greenie- Wiennies" and say "Oh, this is great.  Let's just ban all internal combustion engines".  After he gets the legislation passed, he is done and has no idea where to go. 

All I can see here is a typical giant "gobberment" cluster screw up.

They need to enroll top scientist, engineers and manufacturers.  Get the cost of the batteries down and figure out a way to recycle the batteries.

I cannot get excited about the rush to EVs without a more definitive plan.  My engineering brain cannot see any road to a organized change.

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2022 at 7:29 AM, TXiceman said:

They need to enroll top scientist, engineers and manufacturers.  Get the cost of the batteries down and figure out a way to recycle the batteries.

 

For those interested in the facts, here are some more. Ken I appreciate your opinion but respectfully, I, and the facts, disagree. The entire world and vehicle industries are all deeply involved in just those very things and much more.

I have posted FYI articles that detailed the new recycling plants for EV batteries and how they may provide purer raw materials than the mining and refining in one step does etc.

There is so much more involving the biggest researchers, manufacturers, and battery producers.  Some more for your perusal.

Excerpt:

Electric Vehicle (EV) Market Size Expected to Reach USD 917.70 Billion with a CAGR of 20.6% in 2028

"The global Electric Vehicle (EV) Market size is expected to reach USD 917.70 Billion in 2028 and register a revenue CAGR of 20.6% over the forecast period, according to a latest report by Reports and Data. Supportive government policies and regulations, rising environmental concerns, decreasing prices of batteries, and advancements in charging technologies are some key factors expected to drive market revenue growth. Technological advancements have brought down overall cost of Electric Vehicles (EVs) and various battery producers are specializing in offering excessive-capacity batteries and lowering battery prices to develop cost-efficient and high performance electric mobility."

Source: https://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/electric-vehicle-ev-market-size-expected-to-reach-usd-917-70-billion-with-a-cagr-of-20-6-in-2028#:~:text= Technological advancements have brought down overall cost,are responding well to the ever-changing market trends.

 

Groundbreaking advances emerging vehicle battery production

"Ford and its battery partner, SK Innovation of South Korea, will build twin battery plants outside Glendale in central Kentucky. That $5.8 billion megaproject in Hardin County will create 5,000 jobs to produce batteries for the automaker’s next generation of electric vehicles.

The emerging EV battery segment will “reverberate” across many Kentucky communities, as battery producers attract suppliers opening plants in the state, Beshear said Tuesday. Deaton said the Envision AESC factory will provide “a catalyst for further investment in the local supply chain.”

The sector’s development already is paying dividends elsewhere, the governor said.

Last week, Advanced Nano Products, a supplier of carbon battery nanomaterials used in EV battery production, said it will locate a plant in Hardin County to supply EV battery plants throughout the region. The project will create 93 jobs.

Ascend Elements Inc., a producer of advanced battery materials made from recycled lithium-ion batteries, said recently it will invest $310 million and create 250 full-time jobs in Christian County in western Kentucky. Ascend’s Kentucky operation will serve a range of EV-related customers."

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/groundbreaking-advances-emerging-vehicle-battery-production/

New, Really New EV Battery News. It’s New. Really!

"Sodium batteries. Sulfur batteries. The quest for cheaper, more powerful batteries is accelerating.

There are two things electric vehicle manufacturers want — batteries that cost less, and batteries with higher energy density. (It would be nice if they didn’t tend to catch fire, too.) Unfortunately, those two goals are pretty much mutually exclusive. Lithium iron phosphate batteries cost less, but have relatively low energy density. Conventional lithium-ion batteries that include cobalt, nickel, or other minerals have the highest available energy density, but are expensive. The market is starting to diverge, with the more costly batteries going into high-end cars and those that cost less  being used to power less expensive models.

The thing to keep in mind is that battery research is going on in laboratories around the world. There are lots of possibilities being explored, but none have reached the point where they are ready for production in commercial quantities. Another factor to keep in mind is that battery manufacturers have invested billions in the equipment that makes battery cells. Any new technology that cannot utilize the existing production process is going to get a chilly reception from the industry.

Sodium-Ion Batteries

Sodium-ion batteries have been around almost as long as lithium-ion batteries. Sodium is 300 times more abundant than lithium, which makes it far less expensive, but early sodium-ion batteries had low energy density and a short lifespan. Lithium-ion became the darling of the energy storage industry and sodium was relegated to the backwaters of battery research.

But things are changing. In July of this year, CATL announced it had developed sodium-ion battery cells with an energy density of 160 Wh/kg. The best lithium-ion cells can store 240 Wh/kg, but LFP cells are close to that 160 Wh/kg figure. CATL says it plans to get the energy density of its sodium batteries up to 200 Wh/kg by the time production begins in 2023. In August, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology said it would prioritize the development, standardization, and commercialization of sodium-ion technology.

Sodium batteries promise to have a longer useful life and faster charging times that other batteries, according to the Washington Post, which claims they could be 30 to 50% less expensive than today’s battery cells. Let’s think about that for a moment. Cheaper, longer lasting, fast charging, adequate energy density — what’s not to like? They may not be used in a Tesla Model S Plaid, but they could find a home in vehicles priced to sell for under $20,000. Which would you rather have, a few hundred Model S Plaids scattered around the world, or several million low cost, highly efficient electric cars?

Lithium-Sulfur Batteries

Lithium-sulfur batteries have an energy density of up to 600 Wh/kg — more than double the best available lithium-ion batteries. Imagine what that could mean. Cars with 800 miles of range or more would be possible. That’s good. But Li-S batteries tend to eat their electrodes. That’s bad.

Researchers at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia think they have solved the problem by adding a tiny dose of sugar to the formula used to make the electrodes for Li-S batteries. “In less than a decade, this technology could lead to vehicles, including electric buses and trucks, that can travel from Melbourne to Sydney without recharging. It could also enable innovation in delivery and agricultural drones where light weight is paramount,” Professor Mainak Majumder tells The Driven. The research has been published recently in the journal Nature Communications. The researchers found adding glucose, sourced from sugar, protects the electrodes against contamination from the sulfur compounds within the battery.

Sometimes science can find inspiration in the past. The researchers say that they were influenced by a geochemistry report published in 1988 which described now sugar-based substances had the ability to resist degradation in sediments when they formed chemical bonds with sulfides. They have tested new Li-S battery prototypes and found they managed to outperform lithium-ion equivalents for at least 1,000 charge/discharge cycles.

“Each charge lasts longer, extending the battery’s life,” first author Yingyi Huang says. “And manufacturing the batteries doesn’t require exotic, toxic, and expensive materials.” Co-author Mahdokht Shaibani adds that key challenges remain which need to be overcome before Li-S batteries enter commercial production. “While many of the challenges on the cathode side of the battery has been solved by our team, there is still need for further innovation into the protection of the lithium metal anode to enable large scale uptake of this promising technology — innovations that may be right around the corner.”

The research has been supported by the Australian subsidiary of the Thailand-based Enserv Group, which hopes to eventually manufacturer the lithium-sulfur batteries in Australia. “We would be looking to use the technology to enter the growing market for electric vehicles and electronic devices,” says Mark Gustowski, the managing director of Enserv Australia. “We plan to make the first lithium-sulfur batteries in Australia using Australian lithium within about five years.”

Anodes From Food Waste

Researchers at Virginia Tech say they have found a way to make battery anodes from food waste. “This research could be a piece of the puzzle in solving the sustainable energy problems for rechargeable batteries,” says Haibo Huang, an associate professor in the department of food science and technology in VT’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. “Demand for these reusable batteries has skyrocketed and we need to find a way to reduce the environmental impacts of batteries.”

Based on the preliminary results, the researchers found that the fiber component in food waste was the key to develop an advanced carbon materials that could be used as a battery anode, the negative terminal on a battery. “Our unique approach of using agricultural waste-derived carbon materials to host alkali metal, such as lithium and sodium, will bring major advances to agricultural waste processing and battery technology,” says Professor Feng Lin, according to a report by Technology Networks.

The two researchers got the idea to use food waste while playing basketball. “We thought why not convert food waste into battery materials because of how much food waste there is across the globe,” Huang says. “Most of these wastes are put into garbage and then sent to landfills. We just need to solve the battery side. As a food processing engineer, I can modify the composition of the food. I could take the proteins and lipids out, along with some of the minerals, to see how it impacts battery performance.”

They tested different types of food wastes to see if any could be used successfully to make batteries. They found that when certain compounds were removed from the equation, the essential compounds of cellulose, hemi-celluloses, and lignin could work for a battery after they were heat treated.

The anticipated initial uses of the technology are for affordable energy storage solutions for data centers or other large energy storage facilities where the size of the battery is not a factor. Their research will focus on reducing the impurities in the carbon that currently results from the process they invented.

“We have the opportunity to solve two urgent issues in two different industries,” Huang says. “A lot of energy is already put into the production and transportation of food in the food supply chain. We must recover the value from food waste. This is the perfect opportunity, as battery production looks for different materials than the traditional carbon.”

And Then There Is Toyota

Toyota-Bz4x-concept.jpg

Image courtesy of Toyota

Finally in today’s compendium of battery news comes word that Toyota has decided to invest heavily in battery technology and production. We know Toyota has its eye on solid state batteries — as does virtually every other automaker in the world. Solid state batteries replace the semi-liquid paste that actually stores electrons with a pliable polymer. The result is a battery that is less prone to the overheating that can lead to fires, as well as improvements in charging performance and battery life. But the technology is not quite there yet, although companies like QuantumScape, StoreDot, and Sakti3 believe they are close.

According to The Verge, Toyota announced this week it will invest $13.6 billion to create 10 battery production lines by 2025. Eventually, the company says it may have as many as 70 battery manufacturing facilities around the world that could produce 200 GWh of batteries annually. To put that in perspective, Volkswagen and Ford both expect battery production for their electric vehicles will hit 240 GWh per year by 2030.

Toyota hopes that its investments can help to reduce the cost of batteries by 30% thanks to improvements in materials and cell designs. It also plans to make electric cars that are more efficient, resulting in 30% less energy consumed per kilometer. “Through this integrated development of vehicles and batteries, we aim to reduce the battery cost per vehicle by 50 percent compared to the Toyota BZ4X in the second half of the 2020s,” says Masahiko Maeda, the company’s chief technology officer.

Is this a sign that mighty Toyota has finally given up on hydrogen fuel cell technology for its passenger cars? Let’s hope so, although a certain animosity toward electric cars permeates the company from the office of CEO Akio Toyoda on down. Recently, Toyota has been accused of employing lobbyists to delay or derail President Joe Biden’s electric car initiative.

The Takeaway

The world of battery technology is changing so fast, it’s hard to keep up with all the latest news. The only question is whether cheaper, longer lasting, faster charging batteries will reach the market in time to turbocharge the EV revolution. It’s too late to talk about new technology that may be available in 10 or 15 years. The world needs electric vehicles now.

One interesting question is what will happen to fossil fuel companies as more electric cars take to the road? We reported recently that EVs displaced half a billion gallons of gasoline in the US last year. That, folks, is a lot of gasoline, and it bodes ill for the industry and the news is going to get worse as Ford and GM stand on the brink of bringing new electric cars and trucks to market. The pace of innovation is rapid and picking up speed. The golden age of electric transportation is just around the corner and getting closer every day."

Source:

https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/14/new-really-new-ev-battery-news-its-new-really/

 

 

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as limiting production to raise prices, this is nothing new. But the oil companies did it long ago and painted themselves, and us into a corner for increased profits for themselves:

On 8/30/2022 at 5:50 AM, durangodon said:

The plan I've seen is four parts.

2.  Reduce the production of petroleum so that the price goes up enough to discourage people from buying it

 

Don can you show the plan you read, I would like to have it in my link bank, thanks in advance. But to keep it simple, the reduction in refineries was the work of the oil companies themselves to increase profits:

"Oil refining capacity intentionally reduced by big oil:

Excerpt:

“The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/us-oil-refining-capability/

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, RV_ said:

As far as limiting production to raise prices, this is nothing new. But the oil companies did it long ago and painted themselves, and us into a corner for increased profits for themselves:

Don can you show the plan you read, I would like to have it in my link bank, thanks in advance. But to keep it simple, the reduction in refineries was the work of the oil companies themselves to increase profits:

"Oil refining capacity intentionally reduced by big oil:

Excerpt:

“The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/us-oil-refining-capability/

Refining capacity and petroleum production are two separate topics. 

I mentioned petroleum production.  I didn't say I read anything.  I said "the plan I've seen".  I saw and heard a presidential candidate say that he wanted to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  In the first week in office, I saw and heard him take steps to curtain petroleum production.  Over the next year, fuel prices went up over a dollar a gallon.  He told us that was his plan, and he followed through on it.  I suppose that may be one reason he was elected.  I don't know.

I'm not going to make a political comment about whether I think this is a viable plan or not or whether I agree with it.  I'm just relating what I observed, thus "the plan I've seen".

I don't spend eight hours a day on the internet searching for websites which justify my comments.  I don't feel the need to.  You can believe it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely agreed, TXiceman!

The whole world is not "moving toward EV's," as the OP stated.

As of now, there does not exist a plan, or any comprehensive, effective related group of technologies that enable us to dump ICE vehicles and jump directly to EV'S.  Sure, for some people, they may have the 7-figure bank account and a membership card showing their allegiance to the "Climate-Change Alarmist religion."  They may tout their decisions as "only proper" and feel pretty darn good about themselves.  And they certainly may elect to spend a lot of their own money pursuing their virtue-signaling "green dreams."  They just might have the kind of situation that allows them to throw their money around in that manner.  That may be their choice, so I say "go for it."

However, let's be crystal-clear:  To those who are pushing their EV-centric philosophies and "Climate-Change Alarmist views"---  Don't make the mistake to think you can force me (or anyone who chooses to act against your wishes) to get in line behind y'all.  

Perhaps in the future, adequate and practical alternatives to serve our present transportation methods and life needs may be developed.  But no one, no matter how devout, can have their own truths.  The straight, cold fact is that at present, no such comprehensive options exist.

I will never choose to jump out of a perfectly-good airplane without an effective, function-proven and well-fitted parachute.

The Energy-Themed Ponzi scheme of EV's receiving energy from the grid, and then depositing some of it back into said grid outlined in the OP's cited article will simply not work as a genuine solution.  No Perpetual-Motion machine ever has.....

Travel Free!

HFunk

2008 44' NRC on Freightliner Columbia chassis

Pre-Emissions 14L 515HP Detroit Diesel w ZFMeritor Freedomline trans

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HMFunk said:

Don't make the mistake to think you can force me (or anyone who chooses to act against your wishes) to get in line behind y'all.  

Perhaps in the future, adequate and practical alternatives to serve our present transportation methods and life needs may be developed.  But no one, no matter how devout, can have their own truths.  The straight, cold fact is that at present, no such comprehensive options exist.

HM Funk welcome to the SKPs forums!

My posts here are about tech and since I own an EV I am very interested in that subject. Many of my friends here enjoy reading about new developments in computer security, hardware, EVs, and other techie things I find interesting enough to post here as I have been for the last ~22 years. If you don't, don't.

If it did not exist then how have I been driving one for the past two years? The original quote was from Senator Patrick Moynihan:

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Again welcome to the forums and Safe Travels!😊

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@RV_

So you found an EV that meets your enough of your criteria, and you are buying it (the Rivian). Good for you!

However, there are many Americans whose criteria are not met by any model of EV available at present. That does not mean that they are necessarily the ones “behind the power curve” regarding converting to an EV, about whom you referred so clearly in an earlier post……. They may simply have different criteria.

But maybe, just maybe I’m one of those “behind the power curve” people, because current EV options fail to meet my needs in the following specific ways:

I cannot justify their limited range.

I cannot justify the inconvenience of routinely driving to a charging site for recharging, then waiting for an extended time until recharging is sufficiently completed (I’m a full-timer and have no S&B for plugging in).

I cannot justify the use of EV’s with batteries that are ecologically so very dirty, because they require the use of exotic metals mined in corrupt, underdeveloped countries with inefficient, polluting and questionable methods using underpaid workers who live in consistent poverty.

I cannot justify their initial cost.

I cannot justify their total cost and nature of ownership.  You see, I am one of those people who does all my own routine vehicle maintenance, and almost all the as-needed repairs on my vehicles.  With an EV, the requirement for specialized diagnostic and repair equipment would prevent me from doing that.

I cannot justify owning technology/vehicles with unknown and unproven reliability and longevity.

So you judged current EV options as meeting your criteria.  Good for you!  But my criteria are not met by current offerings, and I know those of many others are not met either.

Like I said, until adequate and practical technologies exist that allow people to smoothly “make the move” from ICE vehicles to EV’s, I and most others will not be purchasing one.  Good for you that you’re converting to an EV. But until my criteria are met, count me out!  And forcing people like me to make that move by governmental fiat, misguided "feel-good" corporate policies or restrictive legislation will not be pretty.......

You might even say that EV’s are “behind my power curve…..!!”

Travel Free!

HFunk

2008 44' NRC on Freightliner Columbia chassis

Pre-Emissions 14L 515HP Detroit Diesel w ZFMeritor Freedomline trans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I think you misunderstand. I bought my Tesla Model Y in June 2020 and have been driving an EV for two years. If you have any questions about how they actually are for maintenance and charging I will be happy to answer you.

You have some misconceptions and I will answer those in the next one quoting you. However in no way am I interested in the least in convincing you to buy one. Nor am I arguing. That would be the same as me trying to get someone with a Chevy Diesel to get a Ram with the Cummins like I towed my fiver with for seven years full time. Wasted breath.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2022 at 9:37 AM, HMFunk said:

 

@RV_

So you found an EV that meets your enough of your criteria, and you are buying it (the Rivian). Good for you!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bidens-prime-time-speech-to-call-out-trump-his-loyalists/2022/09/01/4db24dc2-29fa-11ed-a90a-fce4015dfc8f_story.html

RV Replies: As I said above I found my First EV to buy two years ago when the Model Y came out and bought one in June 2020. The Rivian R1T is our second EV and will replace our Subaru Forester which means no more gas pumps or wild pricing rides. I just upgraded my Rivian order from the base Explore Package to the Adventure Package.

However, there are many Americans whose criteria are not met by any model of EV available at present. That does not mean that they are necessarily the ones “behind the power curve” regarding converting to an EV, about whom you referred so clearly in an earlier post……. They may simply have different criteria.

RV Replies: I don't remember saying someone was behind the power curve, although many companies are and are playing catch up transitioning to EVs. Please show where I said that.

But maybe, just maybe I’m one of those “behind the power curve” people, because current EV options fail to meet my needs in the following specific ways:

I cannot justify their limited range.

RV Replies: 300-550 miles range in our car and SUV is fine by us.  150-225 miles range towing at max tow rating for the Rivian is also good for weekends trips for us. https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/autos-trucks/chevys-electric-silverado-beats-fords-f-150-lightning-in-range-power-and-price-see-how-the-trucks-stack-up/ar-AASyVPg

I cannot justify the inconvenience of routinely driving to a charging site for recharging, then waiting for an extended time until recharging is sufficiently completed (I’m a full-timer and have no S&B for plugging in).

RV Replies: There are no trucks that will tow a full-time rig more then 150-225 miles currently available for ordering.  However as a Toad on a trailer, like many vehicles since they can't be towed 4 down or on a dolly, full-timers have a unique advantage in that they can charge their EV since at home most of us install a NEMA 14-50, and the 30 amp is the NEMA TT-30. I charge at home with my Tesla Gen 2 Mobile Connector with a 14-50 adapter. Here's an article with pics of RVrs charging at campgrounds easily. https://ventricular.org/ItsElectric/2020/02/21/charging-your-ev-at-an-rv-park-campground/

xrPJTIcl.jpg

I cannot justify their initial cost.

RV Replies: Average new car prices set to hit record $48,182: https://www.foxnews.com/auto/new-car-prices-record-high-july  My Model Y cost $49,999,99 and I received a rebate check but no tax credit. My Rivian will get the state rebate and the federal tax credit.

I cannot justify their total cost and nature of ownership.  You see, I am one of those people who does all my own routine vehicle maintenance, and almost all the as-needed repairs on my vehicles.  With an EV, the requirement for specialized diagnostic and repair equipment would prevent me from doing that.

RV Replies: What repairs and maintenance? In two years I had to bring it in for an HVAC sensor and front end check. There is no oil to change, no explosions needing mufflers and radiator systems heater cores etc. IT has no ignition system not even a mechanical switch or button. NO oil filter, air filters because no combustion so no air fuel mixtures. No plugs or carburetors or injectors. Realistically only tires and brakes. https://enginepatrol.com/how-long-tesla-model-y-last/

I cannot justify owning technology/vehicles with unknown and unproven reliability and longevity.

RV Replies: https://enginepatrol.com/how-long-tesla-model-y-last/

So you judged current EV options as meeting your criteria.  Good for you!  But my criteria are not met by current offerings, and I know those of many others are not met either.

RV Replies: Good for you too!

But until my criteria are met, count me out! 

RV Replies: You don't need to explain yourself to me or your reasons for disliking EVs - you can just not like them.😊 

 

 

My answers to your comments are in quote above. Click on expand.

However, you did bring up some commonly believed myths about EVs and thanks for the opportunity to get the facts out. Your preferences and mine have nothing to do with the engineering.

Plenty of my fellow engineers like them too! Living in Colorado it is important to me to have AWD. As well EVs are not affected by altitude. Miles per charge, and acceleration are the same as at this altitude. We live at ~6500 feet but regularly drive at higher altitudes touring around the state.

I am posting a lot because the transition to EVs is underway and with the new battery tech, raw materials sourcing, recycling of EV batteries, major manufacturers offerings and issues make for a great investing atmosphere for investors. And I get lots of positive feedback for the info too.

I full-timed with and drove Ram diesels for my last five trucks, and restored or worked on my vehicles too. Happy camper here. It is too late in my life not to have fun and take some risks. YMMV!

Safe Travels!

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an opinion on EVs that I will keep to myself.

BUT.

But here's something to think about. If mental maths, (maths is English not American math 😀), isn't your strong point then simply use a pencil on the back of a napkin. Something those promoting EV's wont do.

According to Mr Google.

290 million vehicles on USA's roads. 5.4 million Hybrids. 1.4 million EV's. As at 2022 and not taking into account any market growth.

The USA sells 15 million new vehicles a year. Again 2021 figures and not taking into account any growth.

To replace the 290 million ICE's with EV's will take just over 19 years, 2041, if ALL sales of ICE's stopped tomorrow. Hit a brick wall type of stop. (You also need to address what happens to those ICEs. And what you do about those folks who can't afford an EV).

Now that can't be done because there isn't the factories to build all the EVs. So add 10 years for planing and construction. You don't design a new vehicle in just a couple of years so EV design will also need to be taken into consideration. Now consider where the materials for the batteries will come from. Nickle is the main component. Has the USA got enough nickle? My information is that forget lithium, nickle will be the problem. There's not enough nickle in the world to make all the EV batteries. I'll ignore political and supply issues.

Now on the back of your napkin use the pencil to calculate how much power will be needed to charge 300+ million EVs each night. Where's that power coming from? Not solar? It's night after all. Maybe wind? If the wind is blowing. Batteries? Go back to my point about where the batteries are coming from.

These are all the question that should be addressed. Not "how far or how much an EV can go or tow.

FWIW in Australia EV's make up just 0.14% of the market. Good luck with the other 99+%.

Utopia is still just a dream by many of those who dream without the use of a napkin and pencil.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of links that may be worth considering.

Australia has AEMO. They are the electricity boffins who run the system. https://www.aemo.com.au/Energy-systems/Electricity/National-Electricity-Market-NEM/Data-NEM/Data-Dashboard-NEM Note the wind and solar figures. (This is a live dashboard). Keep an eye on them. Make sure you have a look at 6pm eastern standard time in Australia. (Australia's east coast currently is having high wind/gales). When the sun has set and the wind has died down.

Re coal no longer being 'reliable'. Be aware that coal has been 'forced' out of our market by regulations and politics. We have coal trains rolling by coal power station on their way to export coal to the likes of China. We can export it but not use it!!! Be aware of the reporting you are reading.

The second link is an interesting read. Draw your own conclusions. https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2022-09-03/electric-vehicle-what-it-is-like-driving-across-australia/101390376

Consider this. In 2016 the state of South Australia had a total blackout. The wind towers shut down due to high wind! It was a bad solar day. The inter connector from the neighbouring state failed. Along came Elon Musk on his white steed and offered South Australia a FREE battery system. The deal was done. It was a secret deal. Why secret? Anyway the battery was good for 20 minutes by most reports. What wasn't reported in the media is that South Australia installed some huge diesel powered back up generators. Oh and a gas fired power station. But hey they are green and leading the world. The fact that they have the highest power prices in the world seems to have been ignored by many.

Welcome to the future.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...