Electric vehicles - what does the future hold? · Page 16

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#301

(I coulda swore you hated Saudi before finding them useful as a political attack vehicle)

frankj1 wrote:

You wouldn't be all wrong in that as 15 of the 19... never forget they said.

However, when you saw them put pen to paper with the accord, they acted as our ally. President Bidet insulted them into trade agreements with China and Russia as well as rebuffing his commands to drill for more oil.

We don't need their oil if we're drilling our own, but this buffoon capped it. Now wants the US on batteries the existing infrastructure cannot support. It never was either. Ours is antiquated. Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

Edited by user 3 years ago | Reason: Not specified

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#302

A new study recently released makes a case that it may be more expensive to “refuel” an EV than one with an ICE.
Link to the article :
https://www.andersoneconomicgroup.com/real-world-electric-vehicle-fueling-costs-may-surprise-new-ev-drivers/

Link to actual study:
https://www.andersoneconomicgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/EVtransition_FuelingCostStudy_10-27-21_table5-expanded.pdf

Abrignac wrote:

Wow - that...is...not...a...good ..."study"

No wonder they are a "boutique consulting house". That has more holes that swiss cheese.
They assume the "average driver" "dead heads" to a top dollar charging station. Most drivers charge at home, over night.
The ICE vehicle goes 100 miles for about $7.50 in gas?? 46 mpg??? Oh, that's the national average....
People per 100 miles spend 2 hours charging on the road, 2 hours traveling to the charger, 2 hours charging at home...wtf?

Ok, so their leaving their "findings" for personal experience with my car:

82 kWh battery - about 350 mile from a full battery
14 cents per kWh to change at home - like 12 bucks for a full tank (real life)
A station charge could cost from 25 to 50 cents per kWh - so wow it could cost $40 buck to fill the tank, worse case.

Say - they left out oil changes for the ICE vehicle - those are free now right?

For the last 6 months I have been spending about 20 cents on the dollar to the gas I bought for the previous 4 door sedan.
ymmv

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#303

Hertz - a trusted name in auto rentals - is going deep buying and renting EV's
Because it's the future, people love them, and they are cheaper to operate:

https://www.thecooldown.com/green-business/hertz-evs-cars-electric-vehicles-rental/

Sunoverbeach
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#304

8. People who love manual transitions.

Brewha wrote:

Izzat some kinda DIY transgender thing? No thank you, sir! I love my stick shift where it is... in either interpretation

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#305

Izzat some kinda DIY transgender thing? No thank you, sir! I love my stick shift where it is... in either interpretation

Sunoverbeach wrote:

Now personally, I have had a long love affair with stick shifts. Transmissions that is.
4 speeds, and even a Chevy 4+3. Loved ‘em.

Day came when I’d rather not have to shift.

Direct drive motors that go 0 to 150 with no shifting are as cool as it gets.

Just sayin’

Abrignac
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#306

Brewha wrote:

That’s why I said may make a case. I’ll admit I didn’t do an in depth analysis of the analysis. Who knows where their loyalties lie. I’m sure there is some truth to some of the things they state, but to what degree is debatable.

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#307

Abrignac wrote:

That fair. In fact there is a lot of media that sells the idea that "EV's are bad".

The irony is the guy "rolling coal" in his pickup, shaking his fist at the EV's - cause they are bad for the environment...

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#308

Brewha wrote:

You were wrong with Covid, you're wrong with EV's and um...I don't own a diesel pickup. You're just WRONG.

California's plan to power EVs has one glaring shortcoming

You may have already heard about California Governor Gavin Newsom’s announcement last year that his state will ban the sale of gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035. Restrictions on how many non-electric vehicles can be sold will begin in just three years. This is making all of the climate alarmists very happy, of course, but there is a significantly large fly in the ointment of this plan. In order to charge up roughly 12.5 million EVs on a daily basis, the state will need to have a lot of electricity available on the power grid. But nobody seems to have run through all of the numbers with the Governor. Some people who actually did the math work with the Institute for Energy Research, and they have some bad news for Governor Newsom. The state’s plan is based on “a myriad of assumptions” about its electrical grid, and a lot of those assumptions are simply unrealistic in a very big way.

California has chosen to ban gasoline-powered vehicle sales as of 2035 and claims that the state will have enough electricity supply to support an all-electric vehicle fleet of 12.5 million cars by then. That surprises many since the state currently cannot even get through the summer/fall season without having to worry about rolling blackouts because of inadequate supplies. To meet EV electricity demand, California will need to build solar and wind power at a rate almost 5 times higher than that of the past decade since they are pushing the de-carbonization of their grid. It will also have to train its residents to charge their electric vehicles only at certain times of the day when excess power is available, i.e. in off-peak periods. California’s grid is already heavily stressed, and it is compelling much higher demand at the same time it is forcing more intermittent sourcing of electricity.

Under the state’s regulation, 35 percent of new 2026 car models sold must be zero-emission, ramping up to 100 percent in 2035. For an all-electric fleet, the state must triple the amount of electricity produced and deploy new solar and wind energy at almost five times the rate of the past decade. At the same time, they are forcing electrification of cars and trucks, California’s state law requires it to shift all of its power to renewable energy by 2045.

What we’re seeing here is the head-on collision of two bad pieces of policy that will crash into each other in barely a decade. One is the ban on gas-powered vehicles and the other is the state’s mandate that all power produced in California must come from renewable sources by 2045. As the linked report notes, industry officials were “surprised” by the announcement that there would be sufficient electricity to charge a fleet of vehicles that size when the state can barely avoid rolling blackouts today during the summer and autumn months today.

In order to reach that goal, California would need to immediately begin constructing enough solar and wind plants to literally triple the amount of electricity that is currently being generated. That means that they would need to put up new wind farms and solar plants at roughly five times the rate they have been able to build them over the past ten years.

Nobody thinks that can actually happen. Both rising prices and supply chain shortages have raised costs and delayed the development of new wind farms over the past two years. This trend is projected to continue. In fact, the completion of new wind installations in the United States dropped 77.5% in the third quarter of 2022 as compared to the previous year, despite generous subsidies from the federal government. No matter how much money the state government throws at the problem, they can’t magically wave their hands and make new power plants appear or make more electricity available on the grid.

Even if the state somehow was able to generate the bare minimum amount of electricity required, under the current plan, they would need to “train” the citizens of the state to only recharge their vehicles during certain times of the day when demand is low. That simply won’t work for some people, particularly shift workers who have to go to their jobs during overnight hours. And since when does the state government get to issue orders and tell people when they can or can’t plug something in? Are we suddenly living in China now? (I don’t know why I asked that. California is looking more and more like China every day in terms of autocratic authority.)

One final issue should also be addressed here. The first phase of EV mandates begins in 2026 when 35 percent of new 2026 car models sold must be zero-emission. What the state isn’t telling its residents is how they plan to enforce that and who will decide which 65% of shoppers will still be able to purchase gas-powered vehicles. If they reach that number by August, will the dealerships be forced to tell people, ‘sorry? You should have ordered sooner. Now come take a look at our supply of EVs that cost three times as much.’

This harebrained scheme is going to come crashing down on the state government’s head at some point. Sadly, many residents will pay the price for all of this. If you live in California, I will reiterate for the umpteenth time that you should really consider moving while you can still find an operational moving van to carry all of your stuff.

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2023/01/30/californias-plan-to-power-evs-has-one-glaring-shortcoming-n527352

Butt, hey...your car makes fart noises. That's really something to um...yeah.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#309

Not my problem. Signed: ex-Californian

MACS
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#310

Next they will legislate when you can charge your EV... and they're already asking for remote shutoffs for these vehicles. And some of the charging stations in CA, along the freeways, have lines of cars waiting to charge.

Like HD... not my problem, but if they export that insanity, it will be.

Edited by user 3 years ago | Reason: Not specified

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#311

As a general rule, California tries to export every idea, scheme, or policy.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#312

But wait...people think that crazy is going to stay in Cali...nope...dey exportin it.

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#313

You were wrong with Covid, you're wrong with EV's and um...I don't own a diesel pickup. You're just WRONG.

Butt, hey...your car makes fart noises. That's really something to um...yeah.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

Upon my soul Dr. Madd Vibe, you seem an angry man.
Did you know that anger does more damage to any vestal that holds it than anything it is poured upon?

I never said you owned a diesel. Perhaps you should consider it a stretch goal.

And why give a sheite about EV’s? You don't want one, fine. Besides that these are complex things that you don’t even have you own opinion on - so you cut n paste the opinions of others having no clue if they are valid.
None.

Edited by user 3 years ago | Reason: Not specified

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#314

As a general rule, California tries to export every idea, scheme, or policy.

HockeyDad wrote:

Bet you heard in on the grape vine……

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#315

Brewha wrote:

I DGAF about your soul. You're wrong again. You are a perfect contrarian. Quick give me some stock picks so I know which ones to stay away from! You know what really causes damage? Communist ideals. The ones you peddle.

Your snide rolling coal was aimed at me and you dont even know what that means because....you're ignorant.

The entire EV is a government money grab and is making America a weaker nation because fools buy into their emperor's new clothes nonsense. Oh, I have an opinion on them. You don't like it! There is no such thing as zero emission, and there never will be.

Edited by user 3 years ago | Reason: Not specified

tonygraz
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#316

....There is no such thing as zero emission, and there never will be.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

I wish we could change that about you.

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#317

For those playing our home game:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#318

This does bring up one thing about the future of EV's - the haters.

That's right, some folks will just get so angry at "them bad EV's" that they will lash out. Not just hate speak or spreading lies, but the cut them off, or run them off the road type stuff. In the name of Freedom.

In accordance with the 5 rules of Stupidity:
Law 5: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#319

The new definition of “rolling coal” is trains carrying coal to power plants to produce EV fuel!

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

3 years ago

#320

one of the largest if not the largest developer/retail landlord in the New England (malls, large office buildings, combo lab/residential/retail etc) just signed a couple hydro-electric deals for renewable power for its new developments.

WS Development.

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: