EV Charging Network Will Target Interstates Before Expanding Into Remote Rural and Crowded Urban Areas

[LightningShow]

I disagree that L1 charging would fit many people's use cases. There's no way I could have had a satisfactory EV experience on 120v home charging, and I only have a 27 mile round trip commute. I also own two other vehicles. People use their cars for more than commuting, especially if they don't have additional vehicles to use while their EV is charging. It just takes too long - and that's in the warmer months. In the colder months the battery heater would be running so much that you'd never get any energy into the battery. When I visit family, they all have 240v receptacles (or have installed them) so I can still use the car before heading home. Sometimes I'm only there for two days, so 120v would not cut it there either.

When I L2 charge at shopping centers, I am rarely charging there long enough to even recoup my mileage to the destination, much less charge enough to make the round trip. I consider these charging opportunities EV luxuries since the spots are generally close to the door and they provide free electricity.

+1 to filling in the gaps vs. installing more in densely populated areas. I think I mentioned this already, but there are huge gaps even in popular places. Try going to the beach on the east coast between New Jersey and Savannah. Tesla's network is a little better there, but it's still pretty sparse.

L1 definitely won't work for many people, although for an efficient EV being used *only* as a commuter, you can get a heck of a lot of miles out of an L1-only charging situation. For a car getting 4 mi/kWh and charging off 120V from 5:30pm to 7:30am you'll get enough to drive over 100 miles a day during the week (assuming total battery capacity is ~250mi). At that point the car is more of a commuting appliance than an all-purpose vehicle but it probably works for some people.

Even for the Lightning ER, you could theoretically get maybe 80 miles a day of commuting with only L1 charging, 70 miles a day would give you a fair bit of buffer (obviously only in warmer climates). Still, for most people this isn't a plausible use case even though it's possible.

Over the summer I was on vacation with my Bolt and I was using a 120V outlet in the garage of the VRBO to keep the car topped up. We were driving quite a bit and didn't have any issues keeping up with it on the L1. I would say people who are driving 10,000-12,000 a year could probably manage it depending on their usage patterns.

Sponsored

 

[greenne]

https://www.prageru.com/video/how-much-energy-will-the-world-need

Are we heading toward an all-renewable energy future, spearheaded by wind and solar? Or are those energy sources wholly inadequate for the task? Mark Mills, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Cloud Revolution, compares the energy dream to the energy reality.

Prager U...LOL

Hardly a unbiased source of info....

 

[TaxmanHog]

Prager U...LOL

Hardly a unbiased source of info....

....staying away from politics..... Why?

You also don't trust Mark Mills, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Cloud Revolution, as well?

Opposing points of view have their place, otherwise everyone is just glad handing each other in an echo chamber.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

....staying away from politics..... Why?

You also don't trust Mark Mills, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Cloud Revolution, as well?

Opposing points of view have their place, otherwise everyone is just glad handing each other in an echo chamber.

As per Wikipedia:
“PragerU, short for Prager University, is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit advocacy group.[4] The organization was co-founded by Allen Estrin and talk show host and writer Dennis Prager in 2009 to create videos on various political, economic, and sociological topics that promote an American conservative viewpoint.[4][5][6][7] The organization relies on tax-deductible donations, and much of its early funding came from oil billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks.[4][7]“
IOW, not a university, and paid by oil money to say whatever oil needs it to say. Too bad you keep falling for it. We won’t.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

And here’s the dish on Mark Mills’ video, I copy/pasted all this from arstechnica but couldn’t have said it better myself:
“Mills complains that our best solar technology is only 26 percent efficient. But that's only true for silicon panels; our best, most expensive panels can clear 40 percent efficiency. The focus on efficiency, however, is also a distraction, because solar panel efficiency is already high enough for solar farms to be economical.
The same issue arises when Mills complains about the efficiency of wind turbines. Is it as high as we would like? No. But who cares? Wind turbines already generate power economically. Improvements would be terrific, but they aren't necessary to make wind and solar work cheaply in the real world.
Mills suggests that the only solution to the peaks and troughs (or "intermittency") of wind and solar is batteries. But there are plenty of additional options, like compressed air storage, pumped hydro, or even fossil fuel plants with carbon capture.
Mills focuses all his attention on what he considers to be the limitations of lithium batteries. But there is plenty of research on other battery chemistries that use different metals entirely.
Mills argues that the lack of batteries is why wind and solar power aren't producing more than three percent of the world's power. Note that he's using "power" to get this figure. If instead he used "electricity," wind and solar now produce over 10 percent globally, starting from zero a few decades ago.
Mills claims that lithium and cobalt are rare earth elements. They are not. This isn't important to his argument, but it's extremely sloppy.
Mills then says he has environmental concerns about the resource extraction needed to build solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries. This a valid concern to have! But it ignores the massive environmental damage caused by fossil fuel extraction and the production of equipment to burn it.
Mills does a similar thing with human rights abuses in places where these materials are sourced. Again, a worthy concern. But it remains a problem for fossil fuels as well.
Mills acts like it's not possible to recycle any of the hardware involved in wind, solar, and batteries. This is an area where work remains to be done, but as a blanket statement, it's certainly not true.
Mills calls our fossil fuel supply "almost inexhaustible." Come on. This is just obviously not true.
Mills compares the rate of oil extraction to the rate of power generation by wind turbines... for no obvious reason whatsoever.”

 

[LightningShow]

As per Wikipedia:
“PragerU, short for Prager University, is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit advocacy group.[4] The organization was co-founded by Allen Estrin and talk show host and writer Dennis Prager in 2009 to create videos on various political, economic, and sociological topics that promote an American conservative viewpoint.[4][5][6][7] The organization relies on tax-deductible donations, and much of its early funding came from oil billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks.[4][7]“
IOW, not a university, and paid by oil money to say whatever oil needs it to say. Too bad you keep falling for it. We won’t.

He's right though, it's a long, long, long time before renewables overtake fossil fuels. Most of us will be dead.

 

[TaxmanHog]

IOW, not a university, and paid by oil money to say whatever oil needs it to say. Too bad you keep falling for it. We won’t.

Open minds learn by many methods, closed minds do not........ no need to attend Harvard, Yale or MIT.

 

[corradoborg]

Open minds learn by many methods, closed minds do not........ no need to attend Harvard, Yale or MIT.

Keeping an open mind does not mean accepting all sources regardless of their reputation. Provide a credible source if you have one. But if you're going to let your point stand on a PragerU post I'm just going to keep laughing.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

Indeed. No learning takes place at Prager “U”because it’s not about learning/ teaching facts. It’s simply a paid mouthpiece for the fossil fuel industry trying to protect its dying business model. Prager tries to look credible by calling themselves a “university”, but it’s not real. I’m sure all this is reflected in their public filings and disclosures, somebody that used to work at, say, the IRS, could probably get a LOT of useful information from those. I checked out their website earlier, and all they want is money and your email address; probably to ask for more money in the future.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

He's right though, it's a long, long, long time before renewables overtake fossil fuels. Most of us will be dead.

What year do you think it’ll happen? I’d say 2030 to overtake (meaning over 50%), and 2040 to almost 100%.

 

[Tony Burgh]

What year do you think it’ll happen? I’d say 2030 to overtake (meaning over 50%), and 2040 to almost 100%.

I’ll take 2040 and 2050.

 

[Kanuck]

I'm aware of what it's called. Just because it happens where you are, in Canada, doesn't mean that it's what the vast majority of electricity purchasers experience. Of course, "hydro" is also not what the vast majority of electricity purchasers have. In the US, water powers only 7% of electricity.

I would also point out several things:

- Residential and commercial rates can vary significantly.
- Utilities often want excess overnight generation to be utilized, and lower rates to incentivize it.
- You are in Canada. The US has approved $7.5B to improve our charging network. The subject of the thread is the US charging network, not Canada's. I have no idea how Canada is, or is not, investing to push towards EVs.

well, pardon me all to hell.

 

[TaxmanHog]

I’m sure all this is reflected in their public filings and disclosures

I'd say we're getting way off topic now, the form 990 return is Public, 6 years available here
https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/allSearch
search by ein 271763901

BTW, they self disclose on their site the latest form 990
https://www.prageru.com/pdfs/prageru-2020-form-990.pdf

 

[LightningShow]

What year do you think it’ll happen? I’d say 2030 to overtake (meaning over 50%), and 2040 to almost 100%.

50% of what? Power generation? Transportation? Total energy supply?

 

[Nick Gerteis]

50% of what? Power generation? Transportation? Total energy supply?

Well, I was responding to your post:
“He's right though, it's a long, long, long time before renewables overtake fossil fuels. Most of us will be dead.”
So go ahead and pick any one of the three and give me a time frame by which you’d think renewables will be over 50%—that’s what I think you meant by “overtake”.
Don’t be shy now, think positive, think big, and great things are going to happen!

Sponsored