- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: where will we get the juice for all these EVs?
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:49 am to Clames
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:49 am to Clames
quote:Well, given that the packs can put out several hundred kW while operating the vehicle, and that a Tesla at least can take a charge at 150kW, you don't think it can put out a small fraction of that to power a home?
Yes, in a vehicle designed for it. That's nothing like plugging it into a house though and expecting to get the same output.
quote:Level 2 goes up to at least 80A (19kW). Ford says their specific charge station will provide 9.6kw to the home. Not quite a 12kw generac, but it'll run quite a bit. And if you've got the pack and the charger, then the cost to hook it up for backfeed is minimal. Certainly less than adding a natgas generator on top.
No it isn't minimal you clod. A level 2 residential charger is about the equivalent of running a plug for a clothes dryer, a 40A to 50A circuit. We are talking 3 times that current capacity.
quote:Ok, you're acting like it's some far-fetched idea rather than the reality that it is.
Didn't say that at all you dishonest shite.
quote:If you have an EV because you like the benefits, and you have an 80amp fast home charger because you like the benefit of that, at that point what is the absolute cheapest and least involved way to also add backup power to your home? You're trying to include the cost of an entire vehicle and charge solution into the standby power value equation.
I said it's expensive and far more involved than you understand.
quote:
Of course you are just a simpleton whose never actually worked on residential electrical issue more complicated than flipping a breaker so I don't expect you to know anything about proper conductor sizing and what's involved with powering a house.
quote:Quick, call Ford's engineering department right away!
I hope you seriously do try to run your house with an EV, you would do the world a favor as another statistic for an electrical house fire.
0
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:59 am to Darth_Vader
Luckily power plants can be built quickly and cheaply
Posted on 6/15/21 at 3:15 am to whiskey over ice
I’ve dumped quite a bit of money into lithium and uranium stocks. I’m banking that they take off to keep up with EV and green energy demands
Posted on 6/15/21 at 3:51 am to tsmi136
This entire thread actually helps prove the OP's point, even though he didn't argue it properly.
1. We will have to burn a lot more hydrocarbons for energy to keep up (NG) (still will have considerable emissions if so, and more FRACKING (yea, I said it))
or
2. Build more nuclear plants (the real green energy)
3. EV's are still horrible options for long distance travel
4. Electrical storage is extremely important, but we're not efficiently there yet.
Bonus Point that I haven't seen mentioned: None of this matters until you get China to clean their trashy selves up. Quit talking about the US cleaning up their emissions. It makes such an unimpactful result until China (and others alike) catch up. Stop crushing our factories and jobs all for the sake of "clean air". When we have extremely clean air already (in comparison), and just keep shooting ourselves in the foot because of our "climate wokeness." I like EV's to a point, but the prog filth obsession is ignorant and annoying.
1. We will have to burn a lot more hydrocarbons for energy to keep up (NG) (still will have considerable emissions if so, and more FRACKING (yea, I said it))
or
2. Build more nuclear plants (the real green energy)
3. EV's are still horrible options for long distance travel
4. Electrical storage is extremely important, but we're not efficiently there yet.
Bonus Point that I haven't seen mentioned: None of this matters until you get China to clean their trashy selves up. Quit talking about the US cleaning up their emissions. It makes such an unimpactful result until China (and others alike) catch up. Stop crushing our factories and jobs all for the sake of "clean air". When we have extremely clean air already (in comparison), and just keep shooting ourselves in the foot because of our "climate wokeness." I like EV's to a point, but the prog filth obsession is ignorant and annoying.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 4:02 am to Darth_Vader
In Germany there's a small amount of EV's and Hybrids that are on the market and they have already had discussions about putting restrictions on loading these vehicles during peak hours. No one has the infrastructure yet to handle this ,but these people keep on pushing as if every vehicle can be eletric tomorrow. The ICE is going to be around for at least another 25 years.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 4:13 am to stelly1025
If 50% of vehicles were EV's, I'm sure the govn't would find a way to tax similar to gas tax which is .35+/gal in LA.
Currently its only around 2%.
These baw with 50K+ trucks, probably spend easy $800-1K month dining out. They not too worried about saving $1.5K in gas a yr to go EV.
Currently its only around 2%.
These baw with 50K+ trucks, probably spend easy $800-1K month dining out. They not too worried about saving $1.5K in gas a yr to go EV.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 4:27 am to bayoumuscle21
Behind the scenes, there's also the desire to be less foreign dependent on utilities and resources.
So when you look at it from a geo-political perspective, it's less about "climate change" and more about a subtle economic cold war going on, imo.
So when you look at it from a geo-political perspective, it's less about "climate change" and more about a subtle economic cold war going on, imo.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 4:27 am to whiskey over ice
quote:
Luckily power plants can be built quickly and cheaply
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:00 pm to EA6B
quote:It's quite literally not the problem that was being discussed.
That’s the entire problem,
quote:Who asked you to want an EV? No one told you you should buy an EV, what are you even talking about right now? An EV isn't for every American, that's not exactly breaking news.
why would I want a vehicle that has to be routed to charging stations that may not be on my chosen route wasting my time, instead of a vehicle that can be refueled off almost every freeway exit, and major intersection in America?
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:02 pm to stelly1025
quote:
they have already had discussions about putting restrictions on loading these vehicles during peak hours
Everything is already regulated to death. I have no doubt EV's will to.
They'll probably be magnanimous enough give us specific times we can power up.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:27 pm to tsmi136
quote:
So when you look at it from a geo-political perspective, it's less about "climate change" and more about a subtle economic cold war going on, imo.
That and the fact that EVs are going to be big business and we either ceded that to other countries including China or keep our competitive edge and reap the financial rewards. Do we want what happened in the 70s to the Big Three to happen again, the car industry is a HUGE driver of industry.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:45 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Not replying to anyone in particular, just piling on.
I too was skeptical about the range limit (~300 miles) of EV's before recharging is needed, so I looked at my driving history. Based on 13 years of data (10 working, 3 retired), my average daily miles driven fall out like this:
0-100 miles - 91%
100 - 200 miles - 5%
more than 200 - 4%
Long distance trips (more than 300 miles) for 3% of all driving. So 4-5 times a year I'd need to plan my trips around proximity to a charging station. Considering how much time I'd free up by not having to change oil, filters, etc. the rest of the year, it's not a bad trade-off.
I too was skeptical about the range limit (~300 miles) of EV's before recharging is needed, so I looked at my driving history. Based on 13 years of data (10 working, 3 retired), my average daily miles driven fall out like this:
0-100 miles - 91%
100 - 200 miles - 5%
more than 200 - 4%
Long distance trips (more than 300 miles) for 3% of all driving. So 4-5 times a year I'd need to plan my trips around proximity to a charging station. Considering how much time I'd free up by not having to change oil, filters, etc. the rest of the year, it's not a bad trade-off.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 2:51 pm to tsmi136
quote:
Behind the scenes, there's also the desire to be less foreign dependent on utilities and resources.
Even leftist publications admitted that with fracking we were/would be energy independent by ~2030. They phrased this as a bad thing because we would quit supporting the economy of already unstable nations
quote:China dominates the lithium battery market.
subtle economic cold war going on, imo.
This makes us MORE dependent on China not less.
China owns so many politicians that a representative on the house intelligence committee can get caught sleeping with a Chinese spy and not be taken off the committee.
Now think about the sudden HUGE push for electric vehicles and subsidies for buyers when gas has been extraordinarily cheap for the past several years until Biden’s inauguration
Link to an Atlantic article about oils abundance and us being self sufficient
quote:
What If We Never Run Out of Oil? New technology and a little-known energy source suggest that fossil fuels may not be finite. This would be a miracle—and a nightmare.
quote:
But it has also unleashed so much petroleum in North America that the International Energy Agency, a Paris-based consortium of energy-consuming nations, predicted in November that by 2035, the United States will become “all but self-sufficient in net terms.”
quote:
business. Worse, most oil nations are so corrupt that social scientists argue over whether there is an inherent bond—a “resource curse”—between big petroleum deposits and political malfeasance. It seems safe to say that few Americans would be upset if a plunge in demand eliminated these countries’ hold over the U.S. economy. But those same people might not relish the global instability—a belt of financial and political turmoil from Venezuela to Turkmenistan—that their collapse could well unleash.
quote:
Natural gas burns so much cleaner than coal that converting power plants from coal to gas—a switch promoted by the deluge of gas from fracking—has already reduced U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions to their lowest levels since Newt Gingrich’s heyday.
Basically it’s not about independence. It’s not about the environment. their assumption is because we have enough oil and natural gas we would throw the world into chaos.
This post was edited on 6/15/21 at 3:04 pm
Page 11 of 11
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News