I definitely DO regret the existence of so many (too many) stupid EV owners, because they contribute to form governments that are forcing [expensive but subsidized] electrification of functions that are very well served by fossil energy. So, this is not just an EV problem, as it is already raising prices of fossil fuels. The correct abbreviation would be BEV – B(attery) being by far the most expensive and long-term harmful element in this insane game. .-
Another cost for a BEV is a single family house, with sheltered parking not connected to the residence, and new electrical service to accommodate the charger. And a real car if you have to actually go someplace outside the radius of a charge.
oldtimerlex
November 5, 2023 6:55 pm
While interesting, this problem is transitional and not just EV. Try to get AV gas outside of major flight areas or fuel in some locations after hours. This is not a long term issue.
Eventually, if EVs are successful for some areas of transportation, there will be an adequate number of charging points or parties will be better prepared.
It won’t get any better. These evil people turn a blind eye to the havoc, misery, and death they mete out in the form of misallocation of resources, poor (and elder) families unable to afford basic necessities of life (power), and child slave labor to mine the rare-earth materials needed to build these miserable EVs. China is laughing at us and using the West’s useful idiots to destroy western civilization, all the while the rest of us fail to understand what this does to our youth.
Don’t hold your breath! To provide enough charging stations it requires a beefed up grid and the electricity to supply it. In many areas, governments are trying to force electrification of functions that are currently very well served by gas – meaning the future holds even more demand for electricity than just for EVs.
If GM had somehow invented the Prius and not ruined its style or renamed it every year or converted into a pickup truck, then nome of this would have been a problem.
Many people who just want A-to-B and back 5 days a week could tolerate an efficient little hybrid.
… if EVs are successful for some areas of transportation …
They are already successful — on golf courses and within the confines of golf course communities for retirees. And that’s it after a century of development of EVs. They will only attain wider “success” when full charging times are down to minutes, not hours, and when spontaneous fires incidents are no worse than fossil fuel cars, and when the driving range of any EV is equal to fossil fuel cars under the full spectrum of everyday driving conditions. When the electric grid goes down, people can still manually pump fossil fuel out of storage tanks if needed, but the EVs will all be immovable bricks. Retirees will have to walk to the golf course and tote their clubs from one hole to the next, but folks who need to get to the hospital, or need firefighters or police to save them from calamity …. will die. There is no reason to put all our faith in EVs when we face that very real prospect of an all-EV future.
“…people can still manually pump fossil fuel out of storage tanks if needed…”
Manual pumps in ‘ye olde days’. A clear cylinder on the top of the unit. A sliding lever, to set quantity, on the side. That raised an overflow tube into the cylinder. Then grab about a four foot handle and pump away. The pump was good for about half a gallon per stroke. Actually pretty good exercise.
You, in a small personal aircraft, can easily plan a trip across the US, and other civilized countries, with fueling stops that correspond with the needed rest breaks from doing the flying. In general in a direct most fuel efficient route. AND you will only still take a few minutes to refuel.
Pick something that ACTUALLY corresponds to the idiocy of EVs.
AND the only way the EV charging issue will be “resolved” is through massive government subsidies.
Mr. lex: As an old timer, don’t you feel like you’ve seen it all before? As Drake points out, your AV fuel analogy couldn’t be worse. Anytime I see a comment along the lines of “someday, EVs may work because….”, it’s as if nobody has been working furiously for 20 years or so at the issue, with no result. Here, the “charger point” issue, if that were the only problem, the US Postal Service would have gone all EV under Obama. An entire fleet that returns to the departure point the same day should be made-to-order, but the Post office didn’t go EV, did it? What did you learn from that? What you should learn is to dump these soft “EV may work someday somewhere” nonsense opinions, they won’t work to replace ICE cars, and wishing they would is actually harmful.
Wow, yes, USPO LLV fleet is a perfect government test bed. I see why that test would be avoided. There is a huge population of elderly widows across the country who need mail to fall through a door slot within a specific time window every day, or else they’ll pick up their wall-mounted land line and call everyone they know. People in that business learn “never let that happen”. Never ever.
California has 10,000 retail gasoline stations. Roughly, figured it takes 5 minutes to refill a gasoline car and more that 15 minutes to recharge an EV. One could assume we need 3xs more recharge stations for an EV population. This is doable with enough money but why do we need to do this.
70% of all new gasoline models since at least 2014 model year are lower emitters that California powered plant emissions used to recharge EVs. CARB oversold EV emissions benefits using fictional assumptions. It is time to call them out on their false assumptions.
It still takes hours- the cell phone market has driven recharge convenience for 3 decades now. The market’s optimal solution to that problem has been car chargers and electrical outlets in airport waiting areas.
Jimk
November 5, 2023 7:14 pm
I’m going to stick with my ICE for a long time yet.
Oh, and the solar roadways would heat themselves, causing the snow to melt… um… provided it snows slowly enough and isn’t too cloudy when it snows and it snows only around noon and…
But according to John Kerry, you can retire the snowplows tomorrow.
Undoubtedly but they should also be mandated V2G so they must only charge when it’s sunny and come back at night to support the grid- Rooftop solar is surging across Australia | Watch (msn.com)
No support equals no charge and they’re supplied new fully charged.
leefor
November 5, 2023 7:24 pm
Wouldn’t it take longer to charge whilst leaving the lights on? /s
Yep.
But I see a new business opportunity! Much like a dog-sitting service, hire someone to go charge your car. Uber or Lyft should offer that service. BEV owners can afford it.
Wonder if they will include that cost in the cost of BEV ownership? LOL
Don’t these people have L2 or L3 chargers at home? Or are they dumb enough to have purchased an EV without access to charging at home? Or try to take a road trip in one?
I simply can’t fathom this… Is it because of the free supercharging that Tesla used to hand out (i.e. they are old model s/roadster owners trying to save a few bucks)?
Some people don’t have the 200A Panels on their service. Many have only 100A panels and no space for an additional 60A breaker to allow for the L2 or L3 cables. Many can only use the 120v slow charging cable that takes 21 hours to recharge a Tesla 3
If the company I work for is typical, most of these high priced EVs were given to them as an executive perk.
(Why does this system keep auto correcting EV to TV? If this is any indication of the quality of artificial intelligence, we really are in trouble.)
Plus take up of EVs in the UK is much greater in the south of England than anywhere else. London alone has far more charging points per person than any other part of the country. Yet again the North – South divide rules in the UK.
Which raises the interesting question of how many miles will an EV do on the power produced by a gallon of fuel burned in a portable generator… Is this more or less efficient than burning it in the car?
But that would be using Fossil Fuel!
The electric generator would need to powered by battery.
AAA and AA would be to small. Probably D batteries would work.
Keep the can of gasoline on the outside of your rig.
Jeffy
November 5, 2023 9:28 pm
EV owners occasionally mention their joy driving past a few gas stations. I bet they wish they could go to a gas station some times. Personally, I am overjoyed to drive past 100,000 or so chargers.
It’s a weird, weird situation. In some urban areas, the virtue-signallers have what’s ultimately a tiny number of EVs and they’re now starting to realize it sucks having to wait in line for ages.
Yet in most of the country, where people don’t have a need or desire to buy a second car just to tool around the city (at enormous taxpayer expense), the few charging stations are empty all day long.
A couple of weeks ago, I was waiting in the car in the parking lot of the hippest of co-op groceries while my wife was shopping. Two shiny, somewhat new charging stations invaded a prime area of the parking lot. I’m sure they were lovingly installed by the hippest of the co-op people.
The entire time I was there, in a near-packed parking lot with the two parking spaces reserved for charging, they remained the only close-in spots not taken.
This was a small town in a mostly rural area. The people who think EVs are the future have no idea that they simply won’t work unless you limit their use to tooling around a city. And even then, you have to plan your charging carefully. And soon enough, it’s going to cost so much more and you won’t be able to charge when you need to charge. And when your car needs service, you’re going to find out that no garage in your area has any idea how to service it, so it has to go to the dealer, which will price your service accordingly – if they have the time to do it at all.
Local shopping center has 4 dedicated parking spots with chargers.
I always think, crazy. Peole only spend maybe 1/2 an hour food shopping, are they that desperate for a charge they have to plug in wherever they go?
I fear your math is a bit off. The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons. A ton is 2000lbs, which would be 15000 tons X 2000 lbs/ton = 30,000,000 lbs of TNT. Convert to kg = 30,000,000/2.2 = 1,363,636 kg.TNT
Therefore, 100kg TNT = 0.007% of one Hiroshima bomb.
I see in another message a discussion of home chargers. I presume it won’t be cheap enhancing your home electrical system for this purpose, I suppose if you can afford an EV, you can afford to update your home but what about the rest of us?
Mr. Zorzin: I recently learned a few bits of info at this site, a guy named Scissor told me the lowest-level, slowest charger does indeed plug in to a standard outlet in US. The great weight of opinion was that they were useless (too slow even for overnight), and expensive electric work needed to upgrade. assuming you own and have a place to park. One particularly foolish commenter, Mr. J, used a 240v extension cord and lived to say so. Miracle.
I don’t understand why climate skeptics seem to be so against the transition to more efficient vehicles, such as the BEV. I suspect there was a similar objection to the transition from horse transport to ICE vehicles, over a century ago. I searched the internet for some historical information on this, and found the following.
“This article from the February 8, 1930, issue of the Saturday Evening Post was featured in the Post’s Special Collector’s Edition: Automobiles in America!
In 1930, Alexander Winton, by then one of the legends of the auto industry, wrote this article for the Post about the wild early days when even promoting the idea of a self-propelling machine would make you the object of ridicule.
But the great obstacle to the development of the automobile was the lack of public interest. To advocate replacing the horse, which had served man through centuries, marked one as an imbecile.
Things are very different today. But in the 1890s, even though I had a successful bicycle business, and was building my first car in the privacy of the cellar in my home, I began to be pointed out as “the fool who is fiddling with a buggy that will run without being hitched to a horse.” My banker called on me to say: “Winton, I am disappointed in you.”
That riled me, but I held my temper as I asked, “What’s the matter with you?” He bellowed: “There’s nothing the matter with me. It’s you! You’re crazy if you think this fool contraption you’ve been wasting your time on will ever displace the horse.”
We should also be aware, that before the widespread availability of gas stations, early motor vehicle owners would typically purchase fuel from general stores or pharmacies, where it was sold in small quantities. Some people also stored fuel in drums or tanks at their homes or places of business. In some cases, people would also make their own fuel by distilling it from coal or wood.
However, as the popularity of automobiles increased, so did the demand for fuel, and gas stations began to appear in the early 1900s.
Likewise, as the popularity of BEVs increase, it is reasonable to presume that the number of public chargers will also increase. What’s the problem?
I’m sure you could find lots of sites on the internet showing how much more efficient BEVs are than ICE vehicles. The figures will vary according to the circumstances, such as driving in a city where there are lots of traffic lights involving frequent stops and starts, or driving in hilly areas where regenerative braking will significantly increase the efficiency compared to an ICE vehicle.
Attached is a pdf article adressing the issue.
“The overall EVER (Electric Vehicle Energy Rating) in the United States was calculated as 4.4, meaning that the average EV travels 4.4 times farther on a given amount of energy than the average gasoline vehicle. This ratio is greater (5.1) in EPA city testing, largely due to regenerative braking, and less (3.6) in highway testing.
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is an organisation with it’s own future foremost in it’s objectives. I could hardly think of a more biased organisation to review the ‘benefits’ of EV’s.
What we have in reality is batteries reliant on rare earth minerals. As Professor Michael Kelly points out, to electrify the domestic UK road transport fleet would require two, three, four, and even five times the known global reserves of many minerals.
So, just what does the rest of the world do for EV’s?
I’ll leave it to you to research just how much material must be mined to extract these rare earth minerals. They are not described as rare for no reason.
By comparison, coal for example, produces a remarkably high proportion of useable material for far less excavation.
A real world experiment was conducted over the last week or two by two British You Tubers. One in a £120,000, 2 year old Porsche Taycan BEV, the other in a £2,500, 14 year old BMW 2 Litre diesel.
The trip was run from John O Groats to lands end (874 miles), the full length of the UK. A classic test of vehicles in the UK.
Over a 700 mile section the Porsche Taycan took eleven hours and used £250 worth of electricity. The BMW managed the trip in seven hours which cost £100 in diesel (My numbers are approximate but in the ball park).
We can also discuss the devastating effects of EV self combustion. Well documented in the press of late with at least two ocean going car transporter disasters caused by self combusting EV’s.
Then we can move onto the repair of a damaged EV, or perhaps insurance companies emerging requirements for storage of damaged EV’s.
Then there’s the escalating costs of insurance for EV’s.
Then there’s the charging infrastructure, which is inadequate in even the early days, but will be in competition with Heat Pumps for home heating as well as everything else to be electrified in our societies, for which western electrical infrastructure is also entirely inadequate.
Now, the emerging problem is the utter destruction of western car manufacturers as China floods the American and European markets with EV’s built to questionable standards and tested to standards not compliant to WLPT regulations.
Ford is reducing it’s exposure to EV’s already as unsold stock builds up in dealers. They have also abandoned the construction of a battery plant in Kentucky. GM is also reducing their EV liabilities for much the same reasons, and they have abandoned a partnership with Honda to build EV’s
Toyota are outright condemning BEV’s.
As for regenerative braking. It is of little use when covering long distances on motorways/highways as the objective is to not use brakes but maintain a steady speed.
You need to do some more research before blindly following the flock.
The Porsche taking 11 hours for 700 miles gives an average of 63.64 mph – maybe feasible on UK roads but unlikely considering the levels of congestion we face nowadays and the probable need to re-charge at least once.
The BMW seems to have averaged 100 mph over the same 700 miles, well above the national speed limit of 70 mph so I very much doubt this figure. Could you re-check?
I don’t disagree with you over the relative merits of EV and ICE but quoting such unbelieveable figures rather undermines your argument. Let’s not fall into the trap of exaggerating everything like the greenies!
Have watched the video (quite entertaining) and can now clarify. The comparison was over a distance of approx. 400 miles (Kendal to Land’s End), not 700, on day 2 of the trip. The BMW took around 7 hours (average 57 mph) with one fuel stop near Worcester, The Porsche EV took 11 hours due to having to queue for chargers en route.
Mr. Vincent: Thanks for letting us know that, even as the EV future lay smoking at your feet like a burned-out parking garage, you are still loyal to the scam. Kinda touching, and so real!
Which would drive cross country and back from, say, NYC to LA?
True, you’d more time to stop and see local sights but you’d have to rent a car at the changing to explore more than the few that might be in walking distance.
ICEs proved their worth free of Government intervention. Free enterprise is responsible for gas stations being built as they did so without the Government intervention via subsidies and/or regulations that went far beyond safety. Ford’s Model T made them affordable for the masses.
EVs have been around for awhile. They’ve proven their “worth”. Without Government intervention, they’d have died out.
The key piece of the quote reads very “dumb” to an electrical engineer. “I’m sure you could find lots of sites on the internet showing how much more efficient BEVs are than ICE vehicles.”
I agree I could find those sites, but they would repeat the same logical error. Once you restrict sources of inefficiency to the vehicle itself, the vehicle without onboard energy generation should always come out more efficient.
Does your opinion account for the generation and distribution of electricity?
The transition from horses to automobiles was done willingly because automobiles were the better alternative. The transition to EVs is mandated by governments not the market as EVs are not the better alternative. EVs are a great niche vehicle but ICEVs are better for most applications. That’s why the ICEV replaced EVs in the early 1900s.
“I don’t understand why climate skeptics seem to be so against the transition to more efficient vehicles, such as the BEV.”
There is no evidence whatsoever—and I’ll invite you to provide a credible reference scientifically establishing the contrary—that BEV’s are “more efficient” in terms of total energy investment for obtaining the manufacturing materials of construction, the parts for assembly, and the full life-cycle accounting (including all environmental remediation and disposal/recycling costs) inherent in such a vehicle compared to such inherent in a typical ICE vehicle.
It is generally true that EV’s are some 15-30% more efficient than ICE vehicles in converting source-originated-to-user consumed Wh-equivalent energy into net mechanical motion of the vehicle (including starting & stopping transients), but such a comparison is far away from full life-cycle accounting of the total energy required for an EV compared to an equal size ICE vehicle.
….. and to for the accomplishment of what goal? These things were never intended for the goal of pure “energy independence” from foreign sources of oil, they are supposed to eliminate fossil fuel usage that ’causes CAGW.’ The reason why climate skeptics are so against EVs being rammed down the public’s throat under the guise of being one way to save the planet from a ‘global boiling’ future is because the IPCC / Al Gore mob has not conclusively proven that what little AGW we’ve seen over the last 150 years is even remotely harmful and in any need of being stopped. It’s just that simple. Give me fact-supported reasons why I should ditch my perfectly good great mpg car in favor of an EV, and I’ll consider it, but try to hoodwink me with unsupportable assertions about range, efficiency, cost, and about it saving an imperiled planet, and you’ll receive a mountain of pushback.
Excellent reference . . . but you missed posting it’s key finding, which is:
“In this paper, we show that the average model year (MY) 2021 EV would cost $48,698 more to own over a 10-year period without $22 billion in government favors given to EV manufacturers and owners.”
Of course, there is an indirect linkage of that extra financial cost to the net energy associated with the buyer obtaining and spending those funds over the stated 10-year period.
And that delta-cost finding did not even include the higher costs EVs incur compared to ICE vehicles for end-of-life disposal/recycling and associated environmental remediation (e.g., disposing of the currently non-recyclable toxic battery components compared to recycling the motor oil and residual gasoline).
So much for the claimed “energy efficiency” superiority of EV’s over ICE vehicles, upon considering full life-cycle accounting.
Vincent dear, why does the government mandate an ever-increasing percentage of EVs, and plan to ban gasoline cars completely? Back then, they did not ban horses ..
I don’t object to a more efficient vehicles. I just don’t agree that BEVs are more efficient.
I do not object to your choosing a BEV. I do object to any attempt to require that I use one. I object to being required to subsidize both the purchase of your vehicle and your fuel.
Motor fuels are easily transported by other vehicles to the final point of use. EV’s a wire from the power plant to their car and that wire has to carry the load of all the EV’s on that final wire. The infrastructure build out is much more expensive
And there you go again, pushing the lie that EVs are more efficient than ICEVs.
TIme and again it has been shown to you all of the relevant things you leave out, but you don’t seem to care.
Nobody is against other people buying EVs, using their own money if that is what they want to do.
When you have to start off your whine with two blatant lies, it doesn’t say much for any of the trash that follows.
cwright
November 6, 2023 4:01 am
I recently came across MGUY’s videos. Highly recommended.
He also has some understanding of the climate cult.
Chris
There’s an EV ad (Lotus, I think) currently running on YouTube using ‘the freedom of electric’ as the strapline. Seems kinda inappropriate…
vboring
November 6, 2023 4:25 am
Investors are trying to build more EV charging.
It is slow because utility equipment lead times have been lengthened by the trade war and pandemic. What used to be stock items now have lead times of months or years.
“Investors Politicians and governmental bureaucrats are trying to build more EV charging.”
There . . . fixed it for you. No charge, pardon the pun.
rovingbroker
November 6, 2023 4:56 am
Happy EV owner: Charge at Home. Home Every Night.
Examples: UPS. Fed Ex. USPS. Taxi Cabs. Police. People with a charger in the garage who don’t often take trips out of town.
Like everything else in the world, EVs are not appropriate for all people, all businesses or all uses.
I don’t know how happy they will be long term. As was pointed out the other day, Hertz found that maintenance costs were much higher for EVs than ICEVs. The customers you mentioned were mostly commercial so when they have to replace the batteries in the vehicle they will experience the high maintenance costs that will hurt their profits. There is no way a commercial EV battery will last as long as a commercial ICEV.
Mr. broker: The proof that your EV enthusiasm is well-spent is all the successful transition to EV by all those “return to base” operations, right? USPS, UPS, FEDEX, taxi cabs and police are all EV by now. EVs are so perfect for such fleets, it’s just unstoppable!
The happy EV owner is as prevalent as the happy cuckold.
I had to look up “cuckold”. Not used very often, but both The English and American definitions refer, basically, to a man who wife is having an affair. (There seemed to be an implication that he was the last to know.)
“Happy EV owner: Charge at Home. Home Every Night”
If you live in California, every new EV charged at night like yours and the new UPS vehicles are 100% charged by natural gas. How can I say this? Go to
and click on the “supply trend” button near the top and use the calendar icon to browse through as many days as you want. Most nights between 8 PM and 7 AM “Renewables” only meet 10-20% of demand, with natural gas supplying the huge shortfall not met by renewables and other methods. Clearly natural gas will meet the needs of every new EV which is charged at night. If you enjoy your EV sausage, it is important to watch how it is really made.
Looking at this EV trend through the lens of “disruptive innovation” it doesn’t look
very encouraging at all. Buying an EV might be something a young, well heeled enviro’ish type male might want for the same reason some buy say a Corvette or a Ferrari, just to cruise around
but for others of a more practical nature they just suck, on every level.. You couldn’t pay me enough to even look at one let alone buy one. The disruptive innovation theory is pretty accurate at times.
Hmmm . . . let’s see . . . if I valued my spare time at the same rate as I am paid in my job, say $50/hr, or ~$100,000/year (since I have to be at or above that income level to afford buying an EV in the first place) and I had to wait one hour in a queue to then wait another hour (minimum) to get a partial charge on my EV, I will have “spent” the equivalent of $100 for that partial charge. And that assumes I’m using a “free” charging station!
In the same context but now considering the scenario of pulling up to an open pump at a gasoline filling station (it is, after all, around 11:15 pm) and putting 5 gallons for a partial fill of my ICE vehicle, I will have invested at most 5 minutes of my time (about $4 equivalent) plus about $30 (tops) for the petrol . . . round it off to $35 total.
Ahhhh, the hidden cost of virtue signaling . . . and not fully recognized by, what, 90% of those EV drivers waiting in line!
“A Tesla can add 200 miles of range in 15 minutes at a Supercharger.”
That is an optimistic claim, seldom realized in the real world.
In fact that exact statement is found in this reference, which goes much further in detailing how a variety of Tesla’s don’t obtain such rapid charging at a “typical” Supercharger station . . . yes, there are a range of outputs from a “Supercharger”: https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/how-long-to-charge-a-tesla
From this linked article: “The size of a Tesla’s battery, along with its temperature and its state of charge at the time of charging (whether its nearly full or nearly drained) can affect charging times significantly. Moreover, depending on the charging level, factors like weather can make a marked difference in the time it takes to charge a Tesla. “Tesla Supercharging can add up to 200 miles of range in as little as 15 minutes. Some Superchargers can charge at up to 250 kW, though there are others that are only capable of delivering 90 to 150 kW. Estimated charging times are based on the average time, so depending on the Supercharger station, real-world times will vary. “EVs charge more quickly when the battery is at a low state of charge. The closer the battery gets to being full, the more slowly it will charge. It usually makes the most sense to charge your battery to about 80%, and as soon as the charging speed begins to ramp down, end the session and get back on the road. “. . .we’ve provided the average time it may take to charge each Tesla model from empty to full via Level 2 and Tesla Supercharging. This gives you a worst-case scenario, since your car won’t likely be dead when you start the charging session, and there’s not often a practical reason to charge all the way to 100%. We also include the time it may take to charge each model to 80% at a Tesla Supercharger.
Tesla Model 3 | Range: 272 miles — Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) to 80%: 25 minutes
{note: 80% of 272 miles is less than 218 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model 3 Long Range | Range: 358 miles — Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) to 80%: 30 minutes
{note: 80% of 358 miles is 286 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model 3 Performance | Range: 315 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes {note: 80% of 315 miles is 252 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model Y Long Range | Range: 330 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes {note: 80% of 330 miles is 264 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model S | Range: 405 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes {note: 80% of 405 miles is 324 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model X | Range: 351 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes“ {note: 80% of 351 miles is 281 miles — TYS}
So, given that I am linearizing the miles added to the stated charging times vis-a-vis stated ranges on a “full charge” as a first-order approximation, one can see that NONE of the above charging times for a typical Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) station actually result in adding “200 miles of range in 15 minutes”.
There are marketing claims, and there is reality . . . it is wise the recognize the difference.
Mr. con: Did you miss the part of the video where the grid wasn’t supplying the chargers? Do you suppose those Tesla superchargers need electricity to work?
If I owned an EV, I would have a home charger that slowly recharged the battery. Why not just have a slow charger on a timer that comes on after midnight and has your car fully charged by morning? I would think for lots of people, this would make perfect sense. I don’t think EVs are any environmental improvements over ICE vehicles, but I do think they will have a growing presence even without all the subsidies. Batteries are getting better slowly but surely. I don’t think EVs are a fad. Solar and wind power generation makes little to no sense. The intermittency issue can not be solved.
EVs are useful for people who don’t need a car in the first place. Everyone else, not so much. It’s instructive to note that where I live, if I had a Tesla (thought experiment here, I never would), I would run out of charge before I got to a Tesla dealer when necessary.
“According to the automaker, its $200 Mobile Connector will add about 3 miles of range per hour to your Tesla. The Mobile Connector plugs into a normal 120-volt wall outlet for Level 1 charging. “If you upgrade to a 240-volt outlet for Level 2 charging using Tesla’s $45 NEMA 14-50 adapter, you can add up to 30 miles of range per hour. Upgrading to Tesla’s $400 Wall Connector bumps it up to 44 miles of range per hour.”
Note that at Level 1 home charging rates and assumed 8 hours between midnight and “morning” would add only about 24 miles of range . . . nothing near a “fully charge” battery for any model of Tesla. Expect similar slow rates for other commercial EVs from other manufacturers.
If you use the lower cost Level 2 charging option, that same assumed 8 hours of charging could add about 240 miles of range . . . but that would only amount to being “full charged” if your Tesla started with its battery already able to provide some 30 to 165 miles range, depending on specific model. EVs from other manufacturers having lower advertised range on a full charge just might be able to be “fully charged” in this scenario.
Cost of adding a 240-volt outlet for Level 2 charging using Tesla’s $45 NEMA 14-50 adapter to your garage (assuming you have such available for parking your EV there overnight) is up to you to ascertain.
Oh, and I would certainly increase my home/townhouse/condo/apartment fire insurance policy if planning to do overnight EV charging at your residence. And make sure those smoke alarms are working.
“home” is a key word in Nelson’s remark.
Living in an apartment, say the 13th floor, means charging “at home” isn’t likely to happen.
Or try to imagine 1,300 residents all plugging in at 6pm. I don’t think so.
mikelowe2013
November 6, 2023 1:03 pm
Joining the queue is just the start. How long to finish charging? Isn’t this just a public demonstration of stupidity?
More good news. These people can’t suffer enough to suit me.
I never feel sorry for stupid people, especially those with too much money.
Self-identifying fools are a great invention.
In French, they use “inclusive” language with masculine.feminine made up spelling: utilisat.eur.rive (or utilisa.teur.trice?) garbage to self ID.
I definitely DO regret the existence of so many (too many) stupid EV owners, because they contribute to form governments that are forcing [expensive but subsidized] electrification of functions that are very well served by fossil energy. So, this is not just an EV problem, as it is already raising prices of fossil fuels.
The correct abbreviation would be BEV – B(attery) being by far the most expensive and long-term harmful element in this insane game.
.-
or, especially highly educated stupid people.
Another cost for a BEV is a single family house, with sheltered parking not connected to the residence, and new electrical service to accommodate the charger. And a real car if you have to actually go someplace outside the radius of a charge.
While interesting, this problem is transitional and not just EV. Try to get AV gas outside of major flight areas or fuel in some locations after hours. This is not a long term issue.
Eventually, if EVs are successful for some areas of transportation, there will be an adequate number of charging points or parties will be better prepared.
They’ve had more than a decade now to sort this shlt out.
What makes you think it will get better.
Hope over experience again.
It won’t get any better. These evil people turn a blind eye to the havoc, misery, and death they mete out in the form of misallocation of resources, poor (and elder) families unable to afford basic necessities of life (power), and child slave labor to mine the rare-earth materials needed to build these miserable EVs. China is laughing at us and using the West’s useful idiots to destroy western civilization, all the while the rest of us fail to understand what this does to our youth.
Experience says everything controlled by electronics gets better – the mechanical parts keep getting cheaper/crappier to recover cost.
examples: tv, computers, phones, watches.
Don’t hold your breath! To provide enough charging stations it requires a beefed up grid and the electricity to supply it. In many areas, governments are trying to force electrification of functions that are currently very well served by gas – meaning the future holds even more demand for electricity than just for EVs.
“Adequate” ain’t enough.
…..he says, as Ford, GM and Honda scale back production, with EV’s piling up on forecourts, unsold even with massive price cuts.
Toyota just condemn them out of hand as a really dumb idea.
The honeymoon is over.
Good grief! How is it possible that when one has to actually pay for one’s stupidity one smartens up quickly?
If GM had somehow invented the Prius and not ruined its style or renamed it every year or converted into a pickup truck, then nome of this would have been a problem.
Many people who just want A-to-B and back 5 days a week could tolerate an efficient little hybrid.
The grid can’t handle it yet. Gasoline or diesel-powered charging stations might work.
They are already successful — on golf courses and within the confines of golf course communities for retirees. And that’s it after a century of development of EVs. They will only attain wider “success” when full charging times are down to minutes, not hours, and when spontaneous fires incidents are no worse than fossil fuel cars, and when the driving range of any EV is equal to fossil fuel cars under the full spectrum of everyday driving conditions. When the electric grid goes down, people can still manually pump fossil fuel out of storage tanks if needed, but the EVs will all be immovable bricks. Retirees will have to walk to the golf course and tote their clubs from one hole to the next, but folks who need to get to the hospital, or need firefighters or police to save them from calamity …. will die. There is no reason to put all our faith in EVs when we face that very real prospect of an all-EV future.
G’Day Russell
“…people can still manually pump fossil fuel out of storage tanks if needed…”
Manual pumps in ‘ye olde days’. A clear cylinder on the top of the unit. A sliding lever, to set quantity, on the side. That raised an overflow tube into the cylinder. Then grab about a four foot handle and pump away. The pump was good for about half a gallon per stroke. Actually pretty good exercise.
AV gas, really?
You, in a small personal aircraft, can easily plan a trip across the US, and other civilized countries, with fueling stops that correspond with the needed rest breaks from doing the flying. In general in a direct most fuel efficient route. AND you will only still take a few minutes to refuel.
Pick something that ACTUALLY corresponds to the idiocy of EVs.
AND the only way the EV charging issue will be “resolved” is through massive government subsidies.
Mr. lex: As an old timer, don’t you feel like you’ve seen it all before? As Drake points out, your AV fuel analogy couldn’t be worse. Anytime I see a comment along the lines of “someday, EVs may work because….”, it’s as if nobody has been working furiously for 20 years or so at the issue, with no result. Here, the “charger point” issue, if that were the only problem, the US Postal Service would have gone all EV under Obama. An entire fleet that returns to the departure point the same day should be made-to-order, but the Post office didn’t go EV, did it? What did you learn from that? What you should learn is to dump these soft “EV may work someday somewhere” nonsense opinions, they won’t work to replace ICE cars, and wishing they would is actually harmful.
Wow, yes, USPO LLV fleet is a perfect government test bed. I see why that test would be avoided. There is a huge population of elderly widows across the country who need mail to fall through a door slot within a specific time window every day, or else they’ll pick up their wall-mounted land line and call everyone they know. People in that business learn “never let that happen”. Never ever.
California has 10,000 retail gasoline stations. Roughly, figured it takes 5 minutes to refill a gasoline car and more that 15 minutes to recharge an EV. One could assume we need 3xs more recharge stations for an EV population. This is doable with enough money but why do we need to do this.
70% of all new gasoline models since at least 2014 model year are lower emitters that California powered plant emissions used to recharge EVs. CARB oversold EV emissions benefits using fictional assumptions. It is time to call them out on their false assumptions.
You assume people are okay with waiting 15 minutes for something they know can take 5 minutes. Also, 15 minutes seems very optimistic.
It still takes hours- the cell phone market has driven recharge convenience for 3 decades now. The market’s optimal solution to that problem has been car chargers and electrical outlets in airport waiting areas.
I’m going to stick with my ICE for a long time yet.
I think all EV chargers should be solar and wind powered… 🙂
I just thought of a genius ‘green’ idea! Solar Freakin’ Roadways!!
Great idea! Just don’t drive at night or in the winter or on cloudy days.
Oh, and the solar roadways would heat themselves, causing the snow to melt… um… provided it snows slowly enough and isn’t too cloudy when it snows and it snows only around noon and…
But according to John Kerry, you can retire the snowplows tomorrow.
Like most ideas, it was had long, long ago.
Eliminate the batteries and run them like the electric trolleys with Overhead Lines
Or better, Slot Cars energized from beneath the roadway
I seem to remember that the problem with slot cars was the tendency to fly off the track when they went around corners 😀
A lot like how EcoNutzies Fly off the Handle when an IC vehicle’s in proximity
Mr. S: The problem with slot cars was that your stinky older brother would not let you play with it! A scientific observation.
Slot cars flew off the track very well when they went around corners made slippery with dish soap. Alas moisture corroded the track’s conductor.
Raise your left hand if you have ever seen one of these.
Raise both hands if you have ridden one.
Trolleys_John-Aguirre.jpg (870×580) (territory-mag.com)
Not exactly this one, but raising both hands 🙂
Undoubtedly but they should also be mandated V2G so they must only charge when it’s sunny and come back at night to support the grid-
Rooftop solar is surging across Australia | Watch (msn.com)
No support equals no charge and they’re supplied new fully charged.
Wouldn’t it take longer to charge whilst leaving the lights on? /s
I’d want as much light as possible on the situation if I was stationary somewhere in California at midnight…
Armed guards at EV charging stations?
Yep.
But I see a new business opportunity! Much like a dog-sitting service, hire someone to go charge your car. Uber or Lyft should offer that service. BEV owners can afford it.
Wonder if they will include that cost in the cost of BEV ownership? LOL
Don’t these people have L2 or L3 chargers at home? Or are they dumb enough to have purchased an EV without access to charging at home? Or try to take a road trip in one?
I simply can’t fathom this… Is it because of the free supercharging that Tesla used to hand out (i.e. they are old model s/roadster owners trying to save a few bucks)?
Some people don’t have the 200A Panels on their service. Many have only 100A panels and no space for an additional 60A breaker to allow for the L2 or L3 cables. Many can only use the 120v slow charging cable that takes 21 hours to recharge a Tesla 3
If the company I work for is typical, most of these high priced EVs were given to them as an executive perk.
(Why does this system keep auto correcting EV to TV? If this is any indication of the quality of artificial intelligence, we really are in trouble.)
45% of UK households have no off street parking.
Plus take up of EVs in the UK is much greater in the south of England than anywhere else. London alone has far more charging points per person than any other part of the country. Yet again the North – South divide rules in the UK.
Moral: don’t use your EV to take a trip north to Yorkshire or Scotland…
I thought the problem has been solved a long time ago by simply buying a portable electric generator and a spare can of diesel fuel or gasoline.
Which raises the interesting question of how many miles will an EV do on the power produced by a gallon of fuel burned in a portable generator… Is this more or less efficient than burning it in the car?
Hybrid
But that would be using Fossil Fuel!
The electric generator would need to powered by battery.
AAA and AA would be to small. Probably D batteries would work.
Keep the can of gasoline on the outside of your rig.
EV owners occasionally mention their joy driving past a few gas stations. I bet they wish they could go to a gas station some times. Personally, I am overjoyed to drive past 100,000 or so chargers.
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/highlights/mind-boggling-report-finds-metro-vancouver-needs-100k-more-public-ev-charging-stations-7648718#:~:text=Upwards%20of%20100%2C000%20new%20public,a%20new%20report%20has%20found.
It’s a weird, weird situation. In some urban areas, the virtue-signallers have what’s ultimately a tiny number of EVs and they’re now starting to realize it sucks having to wait in line for ages.
Yet in most of the country, where people don’t have a need or desire to buy a second car just to tool around the city (at enormous taxpayer expense), the few charging stations are empty all day long.
A couple of weeks ago, I was waiting in the car in the parking lot of the hippest of co-op groceries while my wife was shopping. Two shiny, somewhat new charging stations invaded a prime area of the parking lot. I’m sure they were lovingly installed by the hippest of the co-op people.
The entire time I was there, in a near-packed parking lot with the two parking spaces reserved for charging, they remained the only close-in spots not taken.
This was a small town in a mostly rural area. The people who think EVs are the future have no idea that they simply won’t work unless you limit their use to tooling around a city. And even then, you have to plan your charging carefully. And soon enough, it’s going to cost so much more and you won’t be able to charge when you need to charge. And when your car needs service, you’re going to find out that no garage in your area has any idea how to service it, so it has to go to the dealer, which will price your service accordingly – if they have the time to do it at all.
This is a failed technology.
Local shopping center has 4 dedicated parking spots with chargers.
I always think, crazy. Peole only spend maybe 1/2 an hour food shopping, are they that desperate for a charge they have to plug in wherever they go?
I rarely have the joy of driving past charging stations since I rarely see one to drive past.
I’m constantly driving past gas stations. It’s not like I need to refill twice every block.
Did you know that a Tesla model 3 battery has the energy equivalent of 100kG of TNT?
Better yet, phrase it as (very) roughly 1% of a Hiroshima bomb!
If Olympic size swimming pools aren’t appropriate, newspaper eco-warriors refer to atomic bombs, so it’s only fair.
I fear your math is a bit off. The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons. A ton is 2000lbs, which would be 15000 tons X 2000 lbs/ton = 30,000,000 lbs of TNT. Convert to kg = 30,000,000/2.2 = 1,363,636 kg.TNT
Therefore, 100kg TNT = 0.007% of one Hiroshima bomb.
That’s really not much energy compared to gasoline.
100kg of TNT = about 400 megajoules
10 gallons US (a very small tank) of gasoline has about 1,200 megajoules.
While EV vehicles burst into flames at times–perhaps spontaneously on rare occasion–they don’t explode
We’re back to the old “energy density” thing. Petrol and Diesel contain much more energy than the same weight of batteries
I remember watching a Myth Busters shooting a full tank gas with tracer rounds.
It didn’t even catch fire.
DIdn’t they also try the lighting an oily rag stuffed into the filler tube bit as well?
ICEVs don’t explode either.
I know nothing about EVs. So, you can’t just plug them into an outlet at your home? If not, why not?
I see in another message a discussion of home chargers. I presume it won’t be cheap enhancing your home electrical system for this purpose, I suppose if you can afford an EV, you can afford to update your home but what about the rest of us?
Mr. Zorzin: I recently learned a few bits of info at this site, a guy named Scissor told me the lowest-level, slowest charger does indeed plug in to a standard outlet in US. The great weight of opinion was that they were useless (too slow even for overnight), and expensive electric work needed to upgrade. assuming you own and have a place to park. One particularly foolish commenter, Mr. J, used a 240v extension cord and lived to say so. Miracle.
Just plug it in on Monday and use for a Sunday drive next week!
What if your apartment is not on the ground floor?
You’ll need a long extension cord.
And insurance on it in case someone trips over it while walking down the sidewalk and breaks their leg, or someone steals the extension cord.
This EV scenario has not been thought out very well. Reality is setting in.
I like ICE.
Pretty standard solution…
I don’t understand why climate skeptics seem to be so against the transition to more efficient vehicles, such as the BEV. I suspect there was a similar objection to the transition from horse transport to ICE vehicles, over a century ago. I searched the internet for some historical information on this, and found the following.
“This article from the February 8, 1930, issue of the Saturday Evening Post was featured in the Post’s Special Collector’s Edition: Automobiles in America!
In 1930, Alexander Winton, by then one of the legends of the auto industry, wrote this article for the Post about the wild early days when even promoting the idea of a self-propelling machine would make you the object of ridicule.
But the great obstacle to the development of the automobile was the lack of public interest. To advocate replacing the horse, which had served man through centuries, marked one as an imbecile.
Things are very different today. But in the 1890s, even though I had a successful bicycle business, and was building my first car in the privacy of the cellar in my home, I began to be pointed out as “the fool who is fiddling with a buggy that will run without being hitched to a horse.” My banker called on me to say: “Winton, I am disappointed in you.”
That riled me, but I held my temper as I asked, “What’s the matter with you?” He bellowed: “There’s nothing the matter with me. It’s you! You’re crazy if you think this fool contraption you’ve been wasting your time on will ever displace the horse.”
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/01/get-horse-americas-skepticism-toward-first-automobiles/
We should also be aware, that before the widespread availability of gas stations, early motor vehicle owners would typically purchase fuel from general stores or pharmacies, where it was sold in small quantities. Some people also stored fuel in drums or tanks at their homes or places of business. In some cases, people would also make their own fuel by distilling it from coal or wood.
However, as the popularity of automobiles increased, so did the demand for fuel, and gas stations began to appear in the early 1900s.
Likewise, as the popularity of BEVs increase, it is reasonable to presume that the number of public chargers will also increase. What’s the problem?
Kindly explain what, about BEV’s, is more “efficient”.
I’m sure you could find lots of sites on the internet showing how much more efficient BEVs are than ICE vehicles. The figures will vary according to the circumstances, such as driving in a city where there are lots of traffic lights involving frequent stops and starts, or driving in hilly areas where regenerative braking will significantly increase the efficiency compared to an ICE vehicle.
Attached is a pdf article adressing the issue.
“The overall EVER (Electric Vehicle Energy Rating) in the United States was calculated as 4.4, meaning that the average EV travels 4.4 times farther on a given amount of energy than the average gasoline vehicle. This ratio is greater (5.1) in EPA city testing, largely due to regenerative braking, and less (3.6) in highway testing.
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/84631.pdf
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is an organisation with it’s own future foremost in it’s objectives. I could hardly think of a more biased organisation to review the ‘benefits’ of EV’s.
What we have in reality is batteries reliant on rare earth minerals. As Professor Michael Kelly points out, to electrify the domestic UK road transport fleet would require two, three, four, and even five times the known global reserves of many minerals.
So, just what does the rest of the world do for EV’s?
I’ll leave it to you to research just how much material must be mined to extract these rare earth minerals. They are not described as rare for no reason.
By comparison, coal for example, produces a remarkably high proportion of useable material for far less excavation.
A real world experiment was conducted over the last week or two by two British You Tubers. One in a £120,000, 2 year old Porsche Taycan BEV, the other in a £2,500, 14 year old BMW 2 Litre diesel.
The trip was run from John O Groats to lands end (874 miles), the full length of the UK. A classic test of vehicles in the UK.
Over a 700 mile section the Porsche Taycan took eleven hours and used £250 worth of electricity. The BMW managed the trip in seven hours which cost £100 in diesel (My numbers are approximate but in the ball park).
Part one of the three part series is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUgQf3kLnY4
We can also discuss the devastating effects of EV self combustion. Well documented in the press of late with at least two ocean going car transporter disasters caused by self combusting EV’s.
Then we can move onto the repair of a damaged EV, or perhaps insurance companies emerging requirements for storage of damaged EV’s.
Then there’s the escalating costs of insurance for EV’s.
Then there’s the charging infrastructure, which is inadequate in even the early days, but will be in competition with Heat Pumps for home heating as well as everything else to be electrified in our societies, for which western electrical infrastructure is also entirely inadequate.
Now, the emerging problem is the utter destruction of western car manufacturers as China floods the American and European markets with EV’s built to questionable standards and tested to standards not compliant to WLPT regulations.
Ford is reducing it’s exposure to EV’s already as unsold stock builds up in dealers. They have also abandoned the construction of a battery plant in Kentucky. GM is also reducing their EV liabilities for much the same reasons, and they have abandoned a partnership with Honda to build EV’s
Toyota are outright condemning BEV’s.
As for regenerative braking. It is of little use when covering long distances on motorways/highways as the objective is to not use brakes but maintain a steady speed.
You need to do some more research before blindly following the flock.
The Porsche taking 11 hours for 700 miles gives an average of 63.64 mph – maybe feasible on UK roads but unlikely considering the levels of congestion we face nowadays and the probable need to re-charge at least once.
The BMW seems to have averaged 100 mph over the same 700 miles, well above the national speed limit of 70 mph so I very much doubt this figure. Could you re-check?
I don’t disagree with you over the relative merits of EV and ICE but quoting such unbelieveable figures rather undermines your argument. Let’s not fall into the trap of exaggerating everything like the greenies!
The figures are over one leg of the journey and I probably got the numbers wrong, other than the time taken and the cost’s incurred.
By all means watch the videos and check them.
I average around 60mph on the 400 mile trip from South London to Glasgow so that in itself is reasonable, obviously got the 700 mile number wrong.
And yes, I exceed the speed limit, usually travelling at 90-95mph when practical.
The owner of the two year old Porsche Taycan in the video I posted did a video today on it’s depreciation since he bought it:
Have watched the video (quite entertaining) and can now clarify. The comparison was over a distance of approx. 400 miles (Kendal to Land’s End), not 700, on day 2 of the trip. The BMW took around 7 hours (average 57 mph) with one fuel stop near Worcester, The Porsche EV took 11 hours due to having to queue for chargers en route.
That’s more believable…
Thanks. I watched all 3 video’s and confused myself with the numbers which I didn’t note down at the time.
Mr. Vincent: Thanks for letting us know that, even as the EV future lay smoking at your feet like a burned-out parking garage, you are still loyal to the scam. Kinda touching, and so real!
Which would drive cross country and back from, say, NYC to LA?
True, you’d more time to stop and see local sights but you’d have to rent a car at the changing to explore more than the few that might be in walking distance.
ICEs proved their worth free of Government intervention. Free enterprise is responsible for gas stations being built as they did so without the Government intervention via subsidies and/or regulations that went far beyond safety. Ford’s Model T made them affordable for the masses.
EVs have been around for awhile. They’ve proven their “worth”. Without Government intervention, they’d have died out.
Roads?
The key piece of the quote reads very “dumb” to an electrical engineer. “I’m sure you could find lots of sites on the internet showing how much more efficient BEVs are than ICE vehicles.”
I agree I could find those sites, but they would repeat the same logical error. Once you restrict sources of inefficiency to the vehicle itself, the vehicle without onboard energy generation should always come out more efficient.
Does your opinion account for the generation and distribution of electricity?
At least the tax payers weren’t on the hook for building all the gas stations.
The public chargers don’t charge in the 5 minutes it takes to fill a gas tank at the gas pump.
The transition from horses to automobiles was done willingly because automobiles were the better alternative. The transition to EVs is mandated by governments not the market as EVs are not the better alternative. EVs are a great niche vehicle but ICEVs are better for most applications. That’s why the ICEV replaced EVs in the early 1900s.
Ha!
Cost of purchase
Cost of maintenance
Cost of fueling
Cost of insurance
Range
Really cold weather
Fire potential
If they were such a good idea then the government would not be wasting our tax dollars subsidizing them.
And Biden is trying to force that “good idea” on our military.
If ever there were a wrong test market…
There is no evidence whatsoever—and I’ll invite you to provide a credible reference scientifically establishing the contrary—that BEV’s are “more efficient” in terms of total energy investment for obtaining the manufacturing materials of construction, the parts for assembly, and the full life-cycle accounting (including all environmental remediation and disposal/recycling costs) inherent in such a vehicle compared to such inherent in a typical ICE vehicle.
It is generally true that EV’s are some 15-30% more efficient than ICE vehicles in converting source-originated-to-user consumed Wh-equivalent energy into net mechanical motion of the vehicle (including starting & stopping transients), but such a comparison is far away from full life-cycle accounting of the total energy required for an EV compared to an equal size ICE vehicle.
Too few people understand what you’re saying. You’re right, but the words are too big for some.
But at what economic cost? …..
Overcharged Expectations: Unmasking the True Costs of Electric Vehicles
….. and to for the accomplishment of what goal? These things were never intended for the goal of pure “energy independence” from foreign sources of oil, they are supposed to eliminate fossil fuel usage that ’causes CAGW.’ The reason why climate skeptics are so against EVs being rammed down the public’s throat under the guise of being one way to save the planet from a ‘global boiling’ future is because the IPCC / Al Gore mob has not conclusively proven that what little AGW we’ve seen over the last 150 years is even remotely harmful and in any need of being stopped. It’s just that simple. Give me fact-supported reasons why I should ditch my perfectly good great mpg car in favor of an EV, and I’ll consider it, but try to hoodwink me with unsupportable assertions about range, efficiency, cost, and about it saving an imperiled planet, and you’ll receive a mountain of pushback.
Excellent reference . . . but you missed posting it’s key finding, which is:
“In this paper, we show that the average model year (MY) 2021 EV would cost $48,698 more to own over a 10-year period without $22 billion in government favors given to EV manufacturers and owners.”
Of course, there is an indirect linkage of that extra financial cost to the net energy associated with the buyer obtaining and spending those funds over the stated 10-year period.
And that delta-cost finding did not even include the higher costs EVs incur compared to ICE vehicles for end-of-life disposal/recycling and associated environmental remediation (e.g., disposing of the currently non-recyclable toxic battery components compared to recycling the motor oil and residual gasoline).
So much for the claimed “energy efficiency” superiority of EV’s over ICE vehicles, upon considering full life-cycle accounting.
Vincent dear, why does the government mandate an ever-increasing percentage of EVs, and plan to ban gasoline cars completely? Back then, they did not ban horses ..
I’m not sure that’s true. Is it legal to ride a horse on a highway? How about a sidewalk? I really have no idea.
In the communities I have known where people have horses (one example being Norco, CA), horses are allowed on the roads like bicycles are.
I don’t object to a more efficient vehicles. I just don’t agree that BEVs are more efficient.
I do not object to your choosing a BEV. I do object to any attempt to require that I use one. I object to being required to subsidize both the purchase of your vehicle and your fuel.
Motor fuels are easily transported by other vehicles to the final point of use. EV’s a wire from the power plant to their car and that wire has to carry the load of all the EV’s on that final wire. The infrastructure build out is much more expensive
And there you go again, pushing the lie that EVs are more efficient than ICEVs.
TIme and again it has been shown to you all of the relevant things you leave out, but you don’t seem to care.
Nobody is against other people buying EVs, using their own money if that is what they want to do.
When you have to start off your whine with two blatant lies, it doesn’t say much for any of the trash that follows.
I recently came across MGUY’s videos. Highly recommended.
He also has some understanding of the climate cult.
Chris
Here’s one of MGUY’s latest videos.
EV sceptics will love it!
Chris
Hopeium: the recently discovered element that will solve all the issues related to using BEVs for anything other than powering golf carts.
But it will take another 10 years (from any given year) to make its use practical.
(Meanwhile, we’re stuck with using Nopeium.) 😎
Ha! I’ve been looking for a good, reasonably priced, used, gas powered golf cart for months now without success. Electrics are a dime a dozen.
There’s an EV ad (Lotus, I think) currently running on YouTube using ‘the freedom of electric’ as the strapline. Seems kinda inappropriate…
Investors are trying to build more EV charging.
It is slow because utility equipment lead times have been lengthened by the trade war and pandemic. What used to be stock items now have lead times of months or years.
“
InvestorsPoliticians and governmental bureaucrats are trying to build more EV charging.”There . . . fixed it for you. No charge, pardon the pun.
Happy EV owner: Charge at Home. Home Every Night.
Examples: UPS. Fed Ex. USPS. Taxi Cabs. Police. People with a charger in the garage who don’t often take trips out of town.
Like everything else in the world, EVs are not appropriate for all people, all businesses or all uses.
I don’t know how happy they will be long term. As was pointed out the other day, Hertz found that maintenance costs were much higher for EVs than ICEVs. The customers you mentioned were mostly commercial so when they have to replace the batteries in the vehicle they will experience the high maintenance costs that will hurt their profits. There is no way a commercial EV battery will last as long as a commercial ICEV.
And then there insurance.
Mr. broker: The proof that your EV enthusiasm is well-spent is all the successful transition to EV by all those “return to base” operations, right? USPS, UPS, FEDEX, taxi cabs and police are all EV by now. EVs are so perfect for such fleets, it’s just unstoppable!
The happy EV owner is as prevalent as the happy cuckold.
I had to look up “cuckold”.
Not used very often, but both The English and American definitions refer, basically, to a man who wife is having an affair.
(There seemed to be an implication that he was the last to know.)
Usually raises someone else’s kid.
Taxis and police cars are not usually parked overnight. Most of the time the day shift hands the vehicles off to the night shift.
Post office though.
“Happy EV owner: Charge at Home. Home Every Night”
If you live in California, every new EV charged at night like yours and the new UPS vehicles are 100% charged by natural gas. How can I say this? Go to
https://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html#section-supply-trend
and click on the “supply trend” button near the top and use the calendar icon to browse through as many days as you want. Most nights between 8 PM and 7 AM “Renewables” only meet 10-20% of demand, with natural gas supplying the huge shortfall not met by renewables and other methods. Clearly natural gas will meet the needs of every new EV which is charged at night. If you enjoy your EV sausage, it is important to watch how it is really made.
Crash bang pop!
EVs are Not Selling – YouTube
Start of the global shakeout with one of the 4 dragons-
100,000 EVs Suddenly Turn To JUNK! China’s No.2 EV Company Goes Bankrupt! China’s EVs Have No Future – YouTube
Looking at this EV trend through the lens of “disruptive innovation” it doesn’t look
very encouraging at all. Buying an EV might be something a young, well heeled enviro’ish type male might want for the same reason some buy say a Corvette or a Ferrari, just to cruise around
but for others of a more practical nature they just suck, on every level.. You couldn’t pay me enough to even look at one let alone buy one. The disruptive innovation theory is pretty accurate at times.
Hmmm . . . let’s see . . . if I valued my spare time at the same rate as I am paid in my job, say $50/hr, or ~$100,000/year (since I have to be at or above that income level to afford buying an EV in the first place) and I had to wait one hour in a queue to then wait another hour (minimum) to get a partial charge on my EV, I will have “spent” the equivalent of $100 for that partial charge. And that assumes I’m using a “free” charging station!
In the same context but now considering the scenario of pulling up to an open pump at a gasoline filling station (it is, after all, around 11:15 pm) and putting 5 gallons for a partial fill of my ICE vehicle, I will have invested at most 5 minutes of my time (about $4 equivalent) plus about $30 (tops) for the petrol . . . round it off to $35 total.
Ahhhh, the hidden cost of virtue signaling . . . and not fully recognized by, what, 90% of those EV drivers waiting in line!
Does the argument change when recharging other people’s EV is deducted from your income? ie “you already paid for it”.
Note that those are not Teslas. And they are not using Superchargers. A Tesla can add 200 miles of range in 15 minutes at a Supercharger.
A Tesla can add 200 miles of range in 15 minutes at a Supercharger.
At what cost to the battery life?
That is an optimistic claim, seldom realized in the real world.
In fact that exact statement is found in this reference, which goes much further in detailing how a variety of Tesla’s don’t obtain such rapid charging at a “typical” Supercharger station . . . yes, there are a range of outputs from a “Supercharger”:
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/how-long-to-charge-a-tesla
From this linked article:
“The size of a Tesla’s battery, along with its temperature and its state of charge at the time of charging (whether its nearly full or nearly drained) can affect charging times significantly. Moreover, depending on the charging level, factors like weather can make a marked difference in the time it takes to charge a Tesla.
“Tesla Supercharging can add up to 200 miles of range in as little as 15 minutes. Some Superchargers can charge at up to 250 kW, though there are others that are only capable of delivering 90 to 150 kW. Estimated charging times are based on the average time, so depending on the Supercharger station, real-world times will vary.
“EVs charge more quickly when the battery is at a low state of charge. The closer the battery gets to being full, the more slowly it will charge. It usually makes the most sense to charge your battery to about 80%, and as soon as the charging speed begins to ramp down, end the session and get back on the road.
“. . .we’ve provided the average time it may take to charge each Tesla model from empty to full via Level 2 and Tesla Supercharging. This gives you a worst-case scenario, since your car won’t likely be dead when you start the charging session, and there’s not often a practical reason to charge all the way to 100%. We also include the time it may take to charge each model to 80% at a Tesla Supercharger.
Tesla Model 3 | Range: 272 miles — Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) to 80%: 25 minutes
{note: 80% of 272 miles is less than 218 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model 3 Long Range | Range: 358 miles — Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) to 80%: 30 minutes
{note: 80% of 358 miles is 286 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model 3 Performance | Range: 315 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes
{note: 80% of 315 miles is 252 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model Y Long Range | Range: 330 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes
{note: 80% of 330 miles is 264 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model S | Range: 405 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes
{note: 80% of 405 miles is 324 miles — TYS}
Tesla Model X | Range: 351 miles — Tesla Supercharger to 80%: 30 minutes“
{note: 80% of 351 miles is 281 miles — TYS}
So, given that I am linearizing the miles added to the stated charging times vis-a-vis stated ranges on a “full charge” as a first-order approximation, one can see that NONE of the above charging times for a typical Tesla Supercharger (DC Fast Charging) station actually result in adding “200 miles of range in 15 minutes”.
There are marketing claims, and there is reality . . . it is wise the recognize the difference.
IOW, caveat emptor!
And then there’s the fact any rechargeable battery can only be recharged a limited number of times even it’s only recharged via a “trickle” charge.
Mr. con: Did you miss the part of the video where the grid wasn’t supplying the chargers? Do you suppose those Tesla superchargers need electricity to work?
If I owned an EV, I would have a home charger that slowly recharged the battery. Why not just have a slow charger on a timer that comes on after midnight and has your car fully charged by morning? I would think for lots of people, this would make perfect sense. I don’t think EVs are any environmental improvements over ICE vehicles, but I do think they will have a growing presence even without all the subsidies. Batteries are getting better slowly but surely. I don’t think EVs are a fad. Solar and wind power generation makes little to no sense. The intermittency issue can not be solved.
EVs are useful for people who don’t need a car in the first place. Everyone else, not so much. It’s instructive to note that where I live, if I had a Tesla (thought experiment here, I never would), I would run out of charge before I got to a Tesla dealer when necessary.
“Why not just have a slow charger on a timer that comes on after midnight and has your car fully charged by morning?”
Here’s why (courtesy of https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/how-long-to-charge-a-tesla ):
“According to the automaker, its $200 Mobile Connector will add about 3 miles of range per hour to your Tesla. The Mobile Connector plugs into a normal 120-volt wall outlet for Level 1 charging.
“If you upgrade to a 240-volt outlet for Level 2 charging using Tesla’s $45 NEMA 14-50 adapter, you can add up to 30 miles of range per hour. Upgrading to Tesla’s $400 Wall Connector bumps it up to 44 miles of range per hour.”
Note that at Level 1 home charging rates and assumed 8 hours between midnight and “morning” would add only about 24 miles of range . . . nothing near a “fully charge” battery for any model of Tesla. Expect similar slow rates for other commercial EVs from other manufacturers.
If you use the lower cost Level 2 charging option, that same assumed 8 hours of charging could add about 240 miles of range . . . but that would only amount to being “full charged” if your Tesla started with its battery already able to provide some 30 to 165 miles range, depending on specific model. EVs from other manufacturers having lower advertised range on a full charge just might be able to be “fully charged” in this scenario.
Cost of adding a 240-volt outlet for Level 2 charging using Tesla’s $45 NEMA 14-50 adapter to your garage (assuming you have such available for parking your EV there overnight) is up to you to ascertain.
Oh, and I would certainly increase my home/townhouse/condo/apartment fire insurance policy if planning to do overnight EV charging at your residence. And make sure those smoke alarms are working.
Especially if you wait till after midnight, a slow charge will not recharge your vehicle by morning.
As far as batteries go, the claimed improvements are almost entirely marketing, not reality.
“home” is a key word in Nelson’s remark.
Living in an apartment, say the 13th floor, means charging “at home” isn’t likely to happen.
Or try to imagine 1,300 residents all plugging in at 6pm. I don’t think so.
Joining the queue is just the start. How long to finish charging? Isn’t this just a public demonstration of stupidity?
To the tune of the Beatles All The Lonely People:
All the stupid people
Where do they all come from
All the stupid people
How did they get so dumb.
Feel free to continue.
I often feel like singing that tune lately👍