131–140 of 157 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two cars, much cheaper than a second battery pack. And you have a supply of rolling spare parts.
This is probably the case right now, but I have faith the market will mature and fix that absurdity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's an amazing PR and marketing coup to make it the other way around and presented as something for "liberal weaklings" etc. If there is such a marketing, then people relate to it because EVs are not suited for handling unpredictable situation. You got stuck in a ditch in the middle of nowhere at night, you loss all of your battery getting out of it, and now you are stuck. So you can't take it to unforgiving places…
> You got stuck in a ditch in the middle of nowhere at night, you loss all of your battery getting out of it, and now you are stuck. I find it interesting how you’re presenting that incredibly unlikely scenario as a serious objection to an EV when simply going off the road is a once in a lifetime or less situation for most drivers, much less precisely calibrating it so your vehicle is not damaged too much to be unusa…
In my country, one don't have to go off road to get in that situation. Here I can never trust an EV like I trust an ICE for going to unfamiliar places.
I have said it multiple times, but it is just wishful thinking that humanity will behave differently/responsibly w.r.t disposal/recycle of batteries as EVs start replace ICEs on a global scale. I think it will be an even bigger problem than the current issue with green house gas emissions as the current generation appear to be greatly apologetic to the associated issues, as the past, generation were to the issues of ICE.
The circle of collective blindness repeats!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You got stuck in a ditch in the middle of nowhere at night, you loss all of your battery getting out of it, and now you are stuck. I find it interesting how you’re presenting that incredibly unlikely scenario as a serious objection to an EV when simply going off the road is a once in a lifetime or less situation for most drivers, much less precisely calibrating it so your vehicle is not damaged too much to be unusa…
The EV also has a ton more torque to get out of the ditch, and can apply it at very low speeds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, solar panels and EVs are the way of the self-sufficient rugged individualist. It's an amazing PR and marketing coup to make it the other way around and presented as something for "liberal weaklings" etc.
I think 1600 watts of solar panels produces enough energy to drive an EV 12000 miles a year. Your car though would have to be always plugged in during the day. But probably 3200 watts would be enough for a car used for commuting to be charged mornings, evenings, and weekends.
Where I stay 8 panels is a "small" system. I have 20. In summer that generates 85% of my household needs. (It would be 100% but I deliberately only got a very small 5kw battery.)
In winter it's less (mostly because of heating requirements). But I have space for some more panels, so I'm running the numbers. (I'm currently getting 16% return on capital spent, and there's a point of diminishing returns.)
Obviously ymmv. There are roof, and land, constraints. There are financial constraints etc. But being off-grid, or partially off grid, is very possible for a lot of folk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Were you using DC fast charging stations or level 2? Fast charging is about 2x the price.
If you think about it as "buying fuel" rather than as just a routine part of owning the vehicle I think the "fast charging" seems like how you'd do it. Like how at the turn of the century people bought a mobile telephone to make telephone calls. What do mean it's a computer? Why would you want a handheld computer? Humans are like this about a lot of things, imagine what it was like before widespread universal literac…
And yes, there are also EV owners who are unhappy, but they are much less common. In general, when I talk to EV owners they would not go back to ICE.
Yes, I hear the objections. But I also see communities overcoming those problems. I was in London a couple weeks ago, and I saw multiple EV's parked on the street being charged from the nearest lamppost. This in areas with little to no off-street parking.
I noticed in parking garages more and more charging points. And so on.
Yes, I imagine price does vary. But if the landlord in my office block puts in electric chargers then I expect we'd negotiate the price with him. He wants to keep tenants happy. We want to keep staff happy. I imagine cost of the actual electricity to the employee would be barely above municipal cost rate (if not below it.)
When it comes to charging availability, it's a problem that's pretty easy to solve. The difference in the last 5 years is remarkable. And it will continue to expand as demand picks up. And it can be solved by individuals with individual capital. So it can happen almost overnight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cost of EV energy (to the driver) is about half that of the cost of gas energy. And that's if you buy electricity at charging stations [1]. If you charge at home it gets less. If you have solar at home it approaches zero. Yes, the cost of the car itself is a factor, but even there prices are dropping all the time. >> when you can only take 10% as much fuel effeciency makes all the difference when we discuss % of…
Before I drove an EV, I drove a 50 mpg Prius. At California prices of ~$4/gallon, that’s $.08/mile. My post wildfires NEM2 off peak rate for electricity is $.40/kWh. My Bolt gets 4.5 miles/kWh. That’s $.1125/mile. If I were driving a Tesla it would be worse (my wife’s Tesla lies mercilessly about its range when full; it’s like Elon Musk recapitulates himself; real world it gets about 3.5 miles/kWh), and if I drove a…
And yes, I'm sure there are places where gas and electricity get closer together. In the US gas is mostly untaxed. So it's closer. Elsewhere the tax-cost of gas works in EVs favor. [1].
Also I think PG&E is perhaps not representative of electricity producers.
So sure, in your area, the finances only make sense if you factor in maintenance. And if gas prices remain stable. And if you don't have solar. But again, all these factors vary wildly in various places.
[1] in the long run these taxes will need to be made up elsewhere. So that's a temp saving. But I'm enjoying it while it lasts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's an amazing PR and marketing coup to make it the other way around and presented as something for "liberal weaklings" etc. If there is such a marketing, then people relate to it because EVs are not suited for handling unpredictable situation. You got stuck in a ditch in the middle of nowhere at night, you loss all of your battery getting out of it, and now you are stuck. So you can't take it to unforgiving places…
You have used multiple gallons of gas getting "unstuck" from somewhere? That is a ridiculous scenario.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Australia is at about 3,5 persons per square kilometre and as you say one of the most sparsely populated countries on earth. Compare to for example Denmark at 149 persons per square kilometre. Denmark needs about 35 TWh per year in electricity, so about 1,7% of their land area would need to to covered with panels to supply that. (This is obviously napkin math and just a thought exercise) If they were to convert their…
So why is Denmark along with the Swiss currently working on Thorum?
Because Sweden and Germany and Netherlands all have very high electricity prices due to stalled investments in new energy generation. For example the right-wing government in Sweden. has denied the building of over 340 coastal wind turbines of average 11kW a piece and 40 inland at average 6kW over the past three years because Sweden instead wants to build nuclear reactors. The motivation stated is that this wind power is not needed when nuclear will be built. Meanwhile a location for these new reactors has yet to be chosen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, is this a fleet measure rather than a 'per unit moved'?
Yes, all road transport together uses 20x as much fuel as all marine transport together.
Helicopter express transports only use 1% of the fuel of maritime shipping!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, all road transport together uses 20x as much fuel as all marine transport together.
That's really a strange statement then... Helicopter express transports only use 1% of the fuel of maritime shipping!
I want foot traffic in there, as that’s going to be a huge portion of transport.