1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, new research shows

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

Check out the home prices for a 220 volt charge station, majority of homes in the United States can’t handle an additional breaker for 220 which By the way if you want to drive any length using there 110 Volt charger they “Suggest” an overnight charge. Lastly CA have proven it can’t sustain its own grid without importing electricity from other states WHICH is supplied by fossil fuels! They “EV Maker’s” need either an Everybody on board to drive the costs down or Big Brother to force the change through taxation. The EV’s are counting on A FREE LUNCH for infrastructure pure and simple!

You could take the top 3 U.S. Billionaires total worth and would not come close to the cost of the infrastructure $$$$ needed to do away with gas/diesels engines. Then they have to address the minimum 1.5 million people put out of work in auto supply chain because it won’t be replaced by EV supply chain, that data lies in the fact that every EV manufacturer is using several times more robotic manufacturing equipment. This is just the biggest CLIMATE CHANGE BULLSHIT HOAX ever played by Multi National Corporation’s!

In 2013, I paid for the addition of a 30 Amp 240 VAC circuit to my garage. It would have cost about $300, but I paid an extra $700 to have  the wire run be hidden in the attic instead of exposed.  The charger itself back then was $600. Today, a basic 30 Amp 240 VAC charger is $280. On average, I estimate that I would need to pay an electrician less than $700 to come to an existing house and install the circuit. As part of a new home build, the incremental cost of the circuit would be about $100. When the electrical panel is in or near the garage, the cost is much lower.

I live in a little old house with a 40 amp main input. It technically "can't handle" the additional 30 Amp circuit. I technically can't handle the storve or the dryer, either, but as a practical matter, we have never tripped the main breaker, and since we only charge the EV when we are asleep, The EV will never be a problem. Broiling a steak while drying a load of towels might be a problem, but not the EV.

California imports about 1/3 of our electricity, and that number will go down over the next decade. We also import more than 75% of our crude oil and petroleum products, and more than 75% of our natural gas.  Conversion to 100% EV would reduce our petroleum imports to approximately zero. Measured in either energy or dollars, we currently import several times as much for petroleum as for  electricity. As we increase our use of renewables, we will decrease our imports of natural gas.

New auto factories use new technology, which means less labor per car. This is true for new ICE factories. It is even more true for new EV factories. Ongoing automation is a fact of life in all manufacturing industries. At least for Tesla, all cars sold in the US are built almost entirely with US labor. This is not true of any other car manufacturer.  The alternative to increased automation is to import cars or car parts from countries with lower labor costs.

[RichieRich216 + 454]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The shit show is Texas' unweatherized natural gas and insufficient import capacity because they are too special for that. Then they called another warning in April. Now there are warnings of more possible blackouts this summer...

California rolling blackouts lasted less than two hours and affected less than 10% of the population. Amidst our huge transition we had a minor shortage under extreme conditions. It has already been fixed. We won't have any rolling blackouts this summer.

"As noted earlier, CAISO called two successive 500 MW blocks of controlled load shed on August 14 for a total of one hour and one 500 MW block of controlled load shed on August 15 for 20 minutes."

http://www.caiso.com/Documents/Final-Root-Cause-Analysis-Mid-August-2020-Extreme-Heat-Wave.pdf

😮 OH The great green CA deflect, point to someone or something else, LMFAO

[RichieRich216 + 454]

1 hour ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

In 2013, I paid for the addition of a 30 Amp 240 VAC circuit to my garage. It would have cost about $300, but I paid an extra $700 to have  the wire run be hidden in the attic instead of exposed.  The charger itself back then was $600. Today, a basic 30 Amp 240 VAC charger is $280. On average, I estimate that I would need to pay an electrician less than $700 to come to an existing house and install the circuit. As part of a new home build, the incremental cost of the circuit would be about $100. When the electrical panel is in or near the garage, the cost is much lower.

I live in a little old house with a 40 amp main input. It technically "can't handle" the additional 30 Amp circuit. I technically can't handle the storve or the dryer, either, but as a practical matter, we have never tripped the main breaker, and since we only charge the EV when we are asleep, The EV will never be a problem. Broiling a steak while drying a load of towels might be a problem, but not the EV.

California imports about 1/3 of our electricity, and that number will go down over the next decade. We also import more than 75% of our crude oil and petroleum products, and more than 75% of our natural gas.  Conversion to 100% EV would reduce our petroleum imports to approximately zero. Measured in either energy or dollars, we currently import several times as much for petroleum as for  electricity. As we increase our use of renewables, we will decrease our imports of natural gas.

New auto factories use new technology, which means less labor per car. This is true for new ICE factories. It is even more true for new EV factories. Ongoing automation is a fact of life in all manufacturing industries. At least for Tesla, all cars sold in the US are built almost entirely with US labor. This is not true of any other car manufacturer.  The alternative to increased automation is to import cars or car parts from countries with lower labor costs.

This $700.00 fix is truly a red flag, I can make a list of a dozen things that would raise that cost starting with where power enters,  pulling a permit to do the electrical, where you want the charge station……Get my drift?

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

Just now, RichieRich216 said:

This $700.00 fix is truly a red flag, I can make a list of a dozen things that would raise that cost starting with where power enters,  pulling a permit to do the electrical, where you want the charge station……Get my drift?

Of course. I can also think of a dozen ways to drive the cost below $200, which is why I arbitrarily picked $700 as a conservative average. My point is that this does not matter. The customer is spending roughly $1000 for L2 home charging capability for a new vehicle that will have an average cost of $40,000, and by 2030, folks will expect that circuit to be there, just as they currently expect to have a circuit for the clothes dryer. People spend about $800 for an electric clothes dryer, and they pay that same (roughly) $700 to run a circuit for it if it is not already there.

[markslawson + 1,042]

23 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

We also need perhaps one long-trip supercharging station (maybe $50,000) for every 50 EVs: that's another $1000 per EV.

Dan - look I don't mean to be dismissive here but who do you think you're fooling? Go and look at the experience of Norway which has managed to make EVs a major segment of new car sales. Look at how many charging stations they have - its one per five kilometres of highway or some such. You work it by area as well as by numbers on the road. Then there is your quite ridiculous figure for an at work super charger. Where is the car to be charged in a crowded CBD where most people work? In any case, I was just scratching the surface of the costs. Norway offers incentives in road tolls and taxes foregone that add up to about half the cost of the car (an estimate I saw in the UK's Financial Times) to encourage consumers to buy EVs. You can very easily construct a case that EVs will require the government and consumers to pay out (or not get in revenue) the full retail price of the car again.. And I haven't even discussed the additional generating capacity required. Sure, some of it will be at night. So? I don't think you realise the massive extra load on the grid that will occur, if and when there is ever a major take up of EVs. 

[frankfurter + 562]

EV is and will be niche for the foreseeable future. In temperate climes, EV has many advantages. In extreme heat and cold climes, EV tends to be unreliable: but this can change. The big question for EV is the source of the power to recharge. If everybody converts to EV, virtually all grids in the world cannot provide the power needed. We will see soon the addition of Vanadium batteries added to grids for load levelling, which will help but not solve. Only a few countries have potential hydro sources; and when capacity is reached, what then? Thermal means more fossil fuel, so more enviro degradation. Wind and solar are now proven to be near useless for massive power generation. Nuclear, with current tech, means more nuclear waste and more risk of another Fukushima. The only option is for all countries to cooperate and spend $trillions on nuclear fusion-fission reactors. If 5G is any example, cooperation will not occur. Given the geo-political quagmire, we appear doomed to use fossil fuels far into the future.

[surrept33 + 609]

5 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

The only option is for all countries to cooperate and spend $trillions on nuclear fusion-fission reactors.

https://www.iter.org/construction/construction

https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines

Edited May 7, 2021 by surrept33

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 minutes ago, markslawson said:

Dan - look I don't mean to be dismissive here but who do you think you're fooling? Go and look at the experience of Norway which has managed to make EVs a major segment of new car sales. Look at how many charging stations they have - its one per five kilometres of highway or some such. You work it by area as well as by numbers on the road. Then there is your quite ridiculous figure for an at work super charger. Where is the car to be charged in a crowded CBD where most people work? In any case, I was just scratching the surface of the costs. Norway offers incentives in road tolls and taxes foregone that add up to about half the cost of the car (an estimate I saw in the UK's Financial Times) to encourage consumers to buy EVs. You can very easily construct a case that EVs will require the government and consumers to pay out (or not get in revenue) the full retail price of the car again.. And I haven't even discussed the additional generating capacity required. Sure, some of it will be at night. So? I don't think you realise the massive extra load on the grid that will occur, if and when there is ever a major take up of EVs. 

Please re-read my post. I specified an L2 charger at work, not a supercharger. A supercharger would cost $50,000 or so. An L2 charger (240 VAC at 30 Amp) will cost about $1000, because they will be installed en masse in the parking lot. this is also an upper bound: most people do not charge at work, but I wanted to add the $1000-per-EV cost to my conservative "infrastructure" estimate.

With respect to the extra load, I discussed this at considerable length. I don't think you realize average private vehicle in CA goes 13,000 miles/year, which works out to about 10 kWh/day if it's an EV, and we use approximately the same total amount of fuel for commercial vehicles as we do for private vehicles, so the total new load for all of California for 10% penetration is about 2 GW. I don't think you realize that very little new distribution infrastructure is needed because almost all EV charging is off-peak. I don't think you realize that Tesla is building out its superchargers to meet the demand for them and that they are making money, and that about 70% of EV owners have already installed L2 chargers.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

5 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

EV is and will be niche for the foreseeable future. In temperate climes, EV has many advantages. In extreme heat and cold climes, EV tends to be unreliable: but this can change. The big question for EV is the source of the power to recharge. If everybody converts to EV, virtually all grids in the world cannot provide the power needed. We will see soon the addition of Vanadium batteries added to grids for load levelling, which will help but not solve. Only a few countries have potential hydro sources; and when capacity is reached, what then? Thermal means more fossil fuel, so more enviro degradation. Wind and solar are now proven to be near useless for massive power generation. Nuclear, with current tech, means more nuclear waste and more risk of another Fukushima. The only option is for all countries to cooperate and spend $trillions on nuclear fusion-fission reactors. If 5G is any example, cooperation will not occur. Given the geo-political quagmire, we appear doomed to use fossil fuels far into the future.

EVs use off-peak power, so they help with load-leveling more than they hurt. Wind and solar provide massive amounts of energy more cheaply than fossil fuels, but they do require short-term battery storage and longer-term (pumped hydro or other) storage. Fission is politically impossible, fusion is still a fantasy.

The world cannot convert to EVs instantly, so the grids do not need to expand instantly. A 10% penetration by 2030 is aggressive. An additional 5% per year after that is also fairly aggressive. For California, this pace would require approximately  2 GW of new generation between now and 2030 followed by 1 GW per year after that for the next 18 years.

Note that if we also want to move away from natural gas, we will need as much additional generation capacity for that as we do for the EV transition, and the NG transition will require a much larger investment in distribution infrastructure because, by contrast to EVs, NG is used at peak times.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

WattEV to Build Megawatt E-Truck Stop In Bakersfield, California

The company announced that it will build the nation’s first ‘Megawatt E-Truck Stop’ electric-only public truck stop in Bakersfield to serve electric truck transport between California’s fast-growing Central Valley and Southern California’s bustling ports and shipping hubs.

Initially, the site will have installed capacity of 4 MW, eventually growing to 25 MW (with 40 charging bays). Simple math (25 MW/40 stalls) indicates that the average power output to be 625 kW.

https://insideevs.com/news/505837/wattev-megawatt-etruck-stop-charging/

Edited May 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[frankfurter + 562]

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

WattEV to Build Megawatt E-Truck Stop In Bakersfield, California

 

The company announced that it will build the nation’s first ‘Megawatt E-Truck Stop’ electric-only public truck stop in Bakersfield to serve electric truck transport between California’s fast-growing Central Valley and Southern California’s bustling ports and shipping hubs.

Initially, the site will have installed capacity of 4 MW, eventually growing to 25 MW (with 40 charging bays). Simple math (25 MW/40 stalls) indicates that the average power output to be 625 kW.

 

The implications of that average power needs some expansion. Each truck will still need the traditional 40 minute charging time, charging as a high rate for the first half and a lower rate for the second half. I suspect the peak (first-half) rate is 1 MW and the second-half rate is below 400 kW.  Another way to say the same thing: my guess is that this is designed to give each truck a charge of about 400 kWh

[frankfurter + 562]

EV means an additional load on the grid. To say recharge is off-peak is true now, but will not be as EV is adopted. Again, the question is what will be the source of power for the recharge?  The chart above gives the picture. The US has no realistic options for renewable hydro remaining. So how the big shift from fossil to renewables will occur is a mystery. EV is certainly an interesting topic to follow.

[frankfurter + 562]

ps. the chart shows also the extent the US depends upon dirty coal. so why demonise China and others for using coal?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, frankfurter said:

ps. the chart shows also the extent the US depends upon dirty coal. so why demonise China and others for using coal?

Because we are rapidly eliminating coal:

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

13 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

EV means an additional load on the grid. To say recharge is off-peak is true now, but will not be as EV is adopted. Again, the question is what will be the source of power for the recharge?  The chart above gives the picture. The US has no realistic options for renewable hydro remaining. So how the big shift from fossil to renewables will occur is a mystery. EV is certainly an interesting topic to follow.

Still plenty of solar to be developed in the south and west and off shore wind in the north east is just getting going. 

Ev's will charge off peak because that is when power is less expensive. Here in California peak is in the evening, You have the rest of the day and night to charge, no need to do it during peak.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

ps. the chart shows also the extent the US depends upon dirty coal. so why demonise China and others for using coal?

I don't demonize China. I do worry about China. In 2020, China did add coal generation capacity, but they added renewables at a faster rate and I think they actually added more renewable capacity than coal in absolute numbers, so the percentage of coal-fired capacity is actually going down. Apparently the political structure gives each Chinese province incentives to become energy independent, which seems to be driving coal, but things are still getting better.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

27 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

Do note that more generation comes from wind than hydro. 

[frankfurter + 562]

2 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

I don't demonize China. I do worry about China. In 2020, China did add coal generation capacity, but they added renewables at a faster rate and I think they actually added more renewable capacity than coal in absolute numbers, so the percentage of coal-fired capacity is actually going down. Apparently the political structure gives each Chinese province incentives to become energy independent, which seems to be driving coal, but things are still getting better.

China over-reacted to demand projections, in 2014-16, and permitted more new plants than required. Those new plants needed at least 5 years to build and source new coal. They have the latest anti-pollution tech. Meanwhile, China invested heavily in wind, solar, NG fired plants, and new NG pipelines. The result is a big shift away from old coal, and hundreds of old coal plants are slated for demolition now and more in near future. New coal is actually more expensive than wind, solar, NG, resulting in new coal placed on emergency reserve status; 40% of all new coal plants are now on reserve status. Thus China is proactively shifting from old to new coal, from coal to NG, reducing coal dependence; despite the lies and demonising reported in the west. This cannot be said for India. India is the greatest enviro threat now, as many hundreds of new coal plants are built without anti-pollution tech.

[frankfurter + 562]

23 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Do note that more generation comes from wind than hydro. 

yes, proof the US has maxed its hydro capability. wind may be nearing max now, too. solar? more in the desert region?  geo? where and what cost?  if coal is phased out, seems the only viable choices are gas and nuclear.

[surrept33 + 609]

7 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

yes, proof the US has maxed its hydro capability. wind may be nearing max now, too. solar? more in the desert region?  geo? where and what cost?  if coal is phased out, seems the only viable choices are gas and nuclear.

The US has a LOT of wind potential: https://maps.nrel.gov/wind-prospector/?aL=F6SWs_%5Bv%5D%3Dt%26_bck--%5Bv%5D%3Dt%26_bck--%5Bd%5D%3D1%26CxvzHk%5Bv%5D%3Dt%26CxvzHk%5Bd%5D%3D2&bL=clight&cE=0&lR=0&mC=35.85343961959182%2C-97.62451171875&zL=5

Of course, requires storage and transmission. But that will come in time.

And Solar as well.

More pumped hydro is also synergistic with all of this.

Edited May 7, 2021 by surrept33

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

25 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

yes, proof the US has maxed its hydro capability. wind may be nearing max now, too. solar? more in the desert region?  geo? where and what cost?  if coal is phased out, seems the only viable choices are gas and nuclear.

Renewables account for most new U.S. electricity generating capacity in 2021:

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=46416

off shore wind is just starting: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administration-plans-major-reboot-u-s-offshore-wind-power-n1262394

Solar in the southwest is going into overdrive.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

3 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

😮 OH The great green CA deflect, point to someone or something else, LMFAO

Just directing your mistaken allegations back where they belong. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

.

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[RichieRich216 + 454]

14 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

In 2013, I paid for the addition of a 30 Amp 240 VAC circuit to my garage. It would have cost about $300, but I paid an extra $700 to have  the wire run be hidden in the attic instead of exposed.  The charger itself back then was $600. Today, a basic 30 Amp 240 VAC charger is $280. On average, I estimate that I would need to pay an electrician less than $700 to come to an existing house and install the circuit. As part of a new home build, the incremental cost of the circuit would be about $100. When the electrical panel is in or near the garage, the cost is much lower.

I live in a little old house with a 40 amp main input. It technically "can't handle" the additional 30 Amp circuit. I technically can't handle the storve or the dryer, either, but as a practical matter, we have never tripped the main breaker, and since we only charge the EV when we are asleep, The EV will never be a problem. Broiling a steak while drying a load of towels might be a problem, but not the EV.

California imports about 1/3 of our electricity, and that number will go down over the next decade. We also import more than 75% of our crude oil and petroleum products, and more than 75% of our natural gas.  Conversion to 100% EV would reduce our petroleum imports to approximately zero. Measured in either energy or dollars, we currently import several times as much for petroleum as for  electricity. As we increase our use of renewables, we will decrease our imports of natural gas.

New auto factories use new technology, which means less labor per car. This is true for new ICE factories. It is even more true for new EV factories. Ongoing automation is a fact of life in all manufacturing industries. At least for Tesla, all cars sold in the US are built almost entirely with US labor. This is not true of any other car manufacturer.  The alternative to increased automation is to import cars or car parts from countries with lower labor costs.

 

8 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Just directing your mistaken allegations back where they belong. 

Jay the other hidden element that nobody’s is talking about is the entire bottom of the EV is batteries, the several crashes that have been reported on truthfully shows what happens when the cells are cracked open, it becomes a hazmat issue, as for get 100% away from fossil fuels, it’s a pipe dream, unless it’s forced upon by government, it will never happen, Wars will be started over this as technology has finally given the poorest nations the ability to get it out of the ground. Unlike the liberals in the U.S. other Countries have no interest in walking away from the most inexpensive source of energy, and don’t bring up the EU because they are as looney as the Liberals here. You get China, Russia and India to do exactly what you and the loons are asking the United States to do and in public they will loosely commit with a far off start date, in private they say this is our chance to take out the great Satan, the only World Power since WW1. And when you’re sitting in the dark the rest of the world will be laughing there asses off! 
 

Fortunately I can live anywhere in the world and take my family with me.