Electric Vehicles

[Andrena]

Folks, as previously stated, if you are now retired, you’ll have to give up your gas guzzler, due to old age, before anybody comes to take it away😂😂😂😂! Scientist are out “in the field” where the evidence is PAINfully clear how carbon is destroying our planet. These people are the leaders in TRYing to convince government to consider the painful facts. The gov is not going to take your RV any more than they will take your gun. Now, you may not want to pay the future gas prices. Relax, enjoy you wonderful life!!!

[grindstone01]

Originally Posted by vtwinwilly

This is what happened to Norway. They hit their peak oil extraction about 10 years ago (oddly about the time they started making a move to EVs). My guess is, if oil was still economical to get out of the North Sea and refine, the push to EVs would have been less significant.

What's said above is a fact and has been part of the auto industry road block to converting to EV's. In 1980, GM had the EV in production and it was only sold in CA. The EV was developed based on the 1970's oil embargo scare and rising gas prices. Once the gas prices went down, the EV was doomed. This cycle has repeated itself a couple of times in the last 40 years with EV success/failure directly related to gas prices raising and falling. Big oil/OPEC pricing can kill a car/energy program at will.

[Itchytoe]

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

No, I understood that you were arguing that scale is an answer in and of itself. I just know that to be demonstrably false.

Then demonstrate it. Just saying people will charge at home so you just need chargers at people's homes doesn't solve anything. Everyone doesn't live in suburbia with 2.3 kids and a garage. There are plenty of people who have to park on the street in front of their house, or in a parking garage. Going to line the streets with chargers and make little parking garages even smaller by shoving charging stations in them? How are you going to handle dually pickup truck? Mine is 8.5 feet wide and 25 feet long. I already don't fit in parking lots. I eat up at least two spaces, sometimes four. Shove a charger between spaces and I eat up a parking space and half of the driving lane too. How are you going to keep batteries charged in a pickup towing a 45 foot 5er across the country? You would need charging stations every half mile on every road just to have enough places for someone to pull over and charge. Then what the heck are they going to do in the middle of nowhere waiting 2 hours to charge their huge battery banks even on a rapid charger.


That's why liquid fuel tanks work so well. They are bigger on bigger vehicles. Fuel tank on Honda Civic is 12 gallons. Fuel tank on F350 is up to 48 gallons. That's 4 times the capacity. That's not hard to do when you're talking about a fuel tank, but when you're talking about a bank of batteries, it becomes harder to fit 4 times the batteries. That would fill up the bed of the truck, but now your truck is much heavier so less efficient. It's also harder to wait 4 times as long to charge your batteries. 30 minutes per charge isn't too terrible, but that's only on a little commuter car with the best chargers we have.


Commuter cars can make about 350 miles per charge. That puts a big truck towing a trailer making, what 150 on a good day? You want me to stop every 150 miles for 2 hours to recharge? Even more often going through mountains? What if I just live where it's cold and batteries last anywhere near as long? Now if I tow through Maine in February, I have to stop every 50 miles for 2 hours? That's just insane. I'd never make it across the country. Me and every RVer on the road will just be lining the shoulder charging. Then what about semis? They would need battery banks so large it would take days to recharge.


Wait a minute, the power grid doesn't have infinite amounts of energy. Power plants only put out so much, so you'll need to double the number of power plants just to keep up with all the RVers traveling during the summer. Ever experience a brown out? That's when the power plant can't keep up with demand. That only gets worse when you start pulling massive amperage with all these rapid chargers trying to charge everyone's batteries. Sure, it's not a problem in Norway, but we have 5 times the demand PER CAPITA than they do. We're sucking 5 times the energy out of the grid than they are, just for vehicles. That's a significant difference. It's 5 times per capita, not in total.



That's the infrastructure difference that you're not seeing. Just charging while you're at home sounds great, but doesn't work logistically. Some people enjoy boondocking for weeks at a time. (I think they are crazy, but they probably think the same about me.) How are they going to charge at home? Put up charging stations all over BLM land?

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Example: Plutonium 241 has a half-life of 14.4 years. Doesn't matter whether you have an ounce of it or a ton... after 14.4 years half will have undergone radioactive decay. The scale is irrelevant to the rate.

So EV adoption has a half-life? That's interesting. What is the half-life of EV adoption? Oh yea, EV adoption has absolutely nothing to do with radioactive half-life.


That's the problem with your line of thinking. You accuse me of bringing up things that are irrelevant, and yet here you are trying to use radioactive decay half-life as an example of why scale doesn't matter in a situation that has absolutely nothing to do with radioactive decay. You're mixing apples and bowling balls.



You're not even paying attention to what I'm saying. Here's a great example:

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Oil is here to stay?

Inherently false. It is a finite resource. It CAN'T be here to stay. Even if there were never a single additional EV sold, oil would not be here to stay. Indeed, the only way oil supplies last to 2100 is if we stop using them and switch to EVs. One way or the other, oils days are numbered.

Nobody said anything even remotely close to "Oil is infinite and will always be available" and yet here you are arguing against it. You've misunderstood scale yet again. Your entire argument is based on the US being able to go 100% EV in 10 years (possibly a little longer) because Norway did it, yet you haven't backed up that claim at all. I'm simply pointing out that Norway doing it doesn't mean the US can. There are significant infrastructure differences between us.

[Gordon Dewald]

Originally Posted by Danj2001

To deny climate change is akin to admitting ignorance. If you care about the future, it needs to be addressed and oil should NOT be in the mix.

95% of selected scientists say it is so!

[followingsea]

Originally Posted by Ted Lambert

It seems to me that there are a lot of New electric and ......

Not compared to sales of F150s.


Our form of goverment makes it very difficult for people in goverment to control how we live.

On the other hand, when push comes to shove there is more of us than them.

Picture 10% of RVers deciding to visit Washington DC the same week a bill is passed.

[CBDunkerson]

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

Then demonstrate it.

Which... of course, I did. The very next words of my post after the section you quoted were an example, labeled "Example:", demonstrating the point.

Here you seem to suggest otherwise... despite acknowledging it later in your post.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

Just saying people will charge at home so you just need chargers at people's homes doesn't solve anything. Everyone doesn't live in suburbia with 2.3 kids and a garage. There are plenty of people who have to park on the street in front of their house, or in a parking garage. Going to line the streets with chargers and make little parking garages even smaller by shoving charging stations in them?

If you are parked in front of your house then you can charge... from your house, and you've obviously never seen a parking garage with EV chargers.

They look like this

No extra space required.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

How are you going to handle dually pickup truck? Mine is 8.5 feet wide and 25 feet long. I already don't fit in parking lots. I eat up at least two spaces, sometimes four.

So... what? You are able to park currently. In the future you will be able to park exactly the same way(s)... there will just be EV chargers there.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

How are you going to keep batteries charged in a pickup towing a 45 foot 5er across the country? You would need charging stations every half mile on every road just to have enough places for someone to pull over and charge. Then what the heck are they going to do in the middle of nowhere waiting 2 hours to charge their huge battery banks even on a rapid charger.

Are you getting your numbers from the early 20th century EVs? They bear no resemblance to anything produced in the 21st.

The Tesla semi is a full size class-8 truck capable of hauling 80,000 lbs. It has a range of over 500 miles and can get 400 miles from a 30 minute charge... which they will do at rest stops along the highways (exactly like ICE semis do currently). They are currently being road tested and go on sale next year.

That's a bigger vehicle carrying a heavier load that can get around and recharge just fine. The first electric pickups (Rivian, Tesla, and the electric Ford F-150) are also coming out in the next year or two. Are you really arguing that all three companies are producing vehicles which will be nearly unusable?

Or should you maybe stop and learn the bare minimums of what you are talking about (e.g. no EV chargers in NYC, can't fit chargers in parking garages, electric trucks impossible, etc) before 'debating' the issues?

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

That's why liquid fuel tanks work so well. They are bigger on bigger vehicles. Fuel tank on Honda Civic is 12 gallons. Fuel tank on F350 is up to 48 gallons. That's 4 times the capacity. That's not hard to do when you're talking about a fuel tank, but when you're talking about a bank of batteries, it becomes harder to fit 4 times the batteries. That would fill up the bed of the truck, but now your truck is much heavier so less efficient.

...and yet, these impossible vehicles already exist. Without the batteries filling up the bed of the truck. So, again, this just isn't true.

Rivian website
Electric F-150 hauling a train... full of gas F-150s

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

It's also harder to wait 4 times as long to charge your batteries. 30 minutes per charge isn't too terrible, but that's only on a little commuter car with the best chargers we have.

Or a full size semi... using either multiple chargers or a single very large 'plug' that charges multiple batteries simultaneously.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

Wait a minute, the power grid doesn't have infinite amounts of energy. Power plants only put out so much, so you'll need to double the number of power plants just to keep up with all the RVers traveling during the summer. Ever experience a brown out? That's when the power plant can't keep up with demand. That only gets worse when you start pulling massive amperage with all these rapid chargers trying to charge everyone's batteries. Sure, it's not a problem in Norway, but we have 5 times the demand PER CAPITA than they do. We're sucking 5 times the energy out of the grid than they are, just for vehicles. That's a significant difference. It's 5 times per capita, not in total.

Yes, converting from ICEs to EVs will require more electricity (though less total energy). Yes, we drive more than Norwegians. No, that isn't going to be a problem. New solar (or wind) capacity can be installed in a matter of weeks... months when financing and permitting are included (though individual projects can of course be delayed indefinitely if permitting is denied). We can and will build enough electrical capacity to cover our needs.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

Some people enjoy boondocking for weeks at a time. (I think they are crazy, but they probably think the same about me.) How are they going to charge at home? Put up charging stations all over BLM land?

Apparently, you think I'm crazy. Electric vehicles will be GREAT for boondocking. That's the primary reason I'm looking forward to the electric trucks coming out. You will be able to run everything off the battery rather than having separate electric, gas, and propane systems.

As to how you charge while boondocking... how do you refuel while boondocking? Generally, you don't. You boondock as long as you can and when your resources run out you go get more. However, with EVs it might actually be possible. If you are boondocking "for weeks at a time" then you could use solar panels to slowly recharge the battery. Not feasible for daily commuting, but if you are sitting in place for two weeks you could do significant recharging.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

So EV adoption has a half-life? That's interesting. What is the half-life of EV adoption? Oh yea, EV adoption has absolutely nothing to do with radioactive half-life.

The citation of radioactive half-life was, as explained, proof that you were incorrect in suggesting that a larger scale inherently leads to a slower rate. You can't follow that? Ok... try smart phones. You have declared the US 30 times the size of Norway and stated that it will therefor take 30 times as long to convert to EVs. Has the US required 30 times as long to adopt smartphones as Norway?

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

You're not even paying attention to what I'm saying. Here's a great example:

Nobody said anything even remotely close to "Oil is infinite and will always be available" and yet here you are arguing against it.

So... when you wrote, "Oil is here to stay." That was not anything even remotely close to "Oil is infinite and will always be available"?

Apparently words mean different things to you than they do to me.

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

You've misunderstood scale yet again. Your entire argument is based on the US being able to go 100% EV in 10 years (possibly a little longer) because Norway did it, yet you haven't backed up that claim at all.

It is true that I have not backed up that claim. Indeed, I have not MADE that claim. First, Norway has NOT gone 100% EV in 10 years... they could get to 100% EV sales if current trends continue. Second, I don't believe that we will convert to EVs as quickly as Norway has. We obviously haven't done so to date... so unless we started converting FASTER than they are we won't be able to catch up. COULD we? Theoretically, but it would be harder for us to do and seems politically and culturally implausible.

That said, it also seems clear to me that we WILL convert to EVs very 'quickly'. The simple fact that every major automaker is working on EV versions of all their vehicles demonstrates that they believe a transition to EVs is imminent. The economic trends show that EVs will soon be cheaper to purchase. They are already cheaper to fuel and maintain. They perform better than ICEs in nearly every way... and are reaching the point where 'range' and 'charge time' are becoming non-issues.

How fast is 'quickly'? Political variables make it difficult to pin down, but I'd say that if anyone is buying a new ICE ground vehicle 20 years from now they are either going to be 'fossil fuel diehards' (e.g. like the 'incandescent light bulbs only' people) or want it for some niche application.

[Gordon Dewald]

Interesting. Norway going to electric vehicles and 49% of their exports are oil. So they are not really going green in the world. Something just seems to scream hypocrite!

The top exports of Norway are Crude Petroleum ($28.1B), Petroleum Gas ($27.7B), Non-fillet Fresh Fish ($5.61B), Refined Petroleum ($4.81B) and Raw Aluminum ($3.12B), using the 1992 revision of the HS (Harmonized System) classification.

[Itchytoe]

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Which... of course, I did. The very next words of my post after the section you quoted were an example, labeled "Example:", demonstrating the point.


..........


How fast is 'quickly'? Political variables make it difficult to pin down, but I'd say that if anyone is buying a new ICE ground vehicle 20 years from now they are either going to be 'fossil fuel diehards' (e.g. like the 'incandescent light bulbs only' people) or want it for some niche application.

Some people just never learn. I'll talk to you again in 10 years. We'll see which of us is right.

[Jlo11111]

Originally Posted by Gordon Dewald

95% of selected scientists say it is so!

Exactly!

[Itchytoe]

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Which... of course, I did. The very next words of my post after the section you quoted were an example, labeled "Example:", demonstrating the point.

Your example doesn't demonstrate what you think it does. It does absolutely nothing to demonstrate that the scale differences between the US and Norway won't have any impact on EV adoption. Your example doesn't even address EV adoption at all.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

If you are parked in front of your house then you can charge... from your house, and you've obviously never seen a parking garage with EV chargers.

Oh, so you're going to run a 100 foot extension cord from your garage outlet through the yard over to the street? Oh, no, because a 15 amp extension cord would melt from the amperage flowing through it. You're actually going to have a huge cable from the charger in your garage run out to the street though your yard. What about apartment complexes? Going to run a cord from your 3rd story window out across the parking lot to your car? No, you're just going to set up charging stations in the parking lot, which makes it use more space.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

and you've obviously never seen a parking garage with EV chargers.


They look like this

No extra space required.

Except that those parking spaces are significantly longer than they would be without the charger in the middle. Look, you've got easily an extra 10 feet in length on those spots. You'd have to be blind to not see the huge gap between the front bumpers of those cars. Go to a grocery store parking lot. Cars are normally parked so close you can barely walk between them. The picture that you linked proves that parking lots and garages will have to eat up more space with the addition of chargers.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

So... what? You are able to park currently.

No, not the way you think. I can back into a parking spot until my rear tires hit stops, and my front bumper will still be sticking out into the lane. I can pull in forward, but then my front tires hit the stops and my rear bumper is in the lane. I have to be extremely picky about where I park at restaurants because I know I'll block the lane if I park close to the door.

Come meet me in a parking lot and I'll show you exactly what I mean. Then we'll put a pole where you want your charger to be and I'll have you park the truck so that it doesn't block traffic. That will show you the problem with "just add chargers to parking lots".

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

In the future you will be able to park exactly the same way(s)... there will just be EV chargers there.

The charger between the two parking spaces would be sticking up through the cab of my truck, or through my rear differential. Two objects of matter cannot occupy the same space at the same time. It's physically impossible to park my truck and not block the main travel lane if I can't extend part of the truck over that line between the two parking spaces. That's why it eats up at least 2 spaces. It doesn't fit in just one. If the parking lots are narrow, I eat up two spaces side by side as well. Put a charger on the sides of the parking space and again, it will have to occupy the same physical space as my doors. That's not physically possible.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Are you getting your numbers from the early 20th century EVs? They bear no resemblance to anything produced in the 21st.

The Tesla semi is a full size class-8 truck capable of hauling 80,000 lbs. It has a range of over 500 miles and can get 400 miles from a 30 minute charge... which they will do at rest stops along the highways (exactly like ICE semis do currently). They are currently being road tested and go on sale next year.

There is a neat physical necessity that exists here in the universe. You can't get more energy out of a machine than you put into it. The class-8 Tesla truck uses more energy to move 80,000 pounds than the model S uses. It's a physical necessity. That's why a towing pickup gets 10 mpg, but a little commuter can get 40. It takes 4 times the energy to move the truck and trailer than the little car. To put that much energy back into the batteries in the same time as putting a lesser amount of energy into a model S, you'll consume more wattage. That class-8 can be charged in half an hour. It can also be charged in 3 minutes. It all depends on how much wattage you put into the batteries. But that's exactly the problem.

Tesla's Supercharger can charge those little commuters in half an hour for 300 miles, but they do it by using about 150 kW of power. 150 thousand watts of power. Your house is wired for 200 amps at 220 volts, which is 44,000 watts of total power. In order to fill up your little model-S (or 3, or X, or whatever) that charger pulls more than three times the maximum power your entire house can draw from the grid at a time. Realistically, with your AC running full blast, and your lights on, and a fan or two, and the TV, and fridge, your house is probably consuming 75 amps at 220v, which is 16,500 watts. Realistically, that charger is pulling the same energy from the grid as 9 houses in the middle of summer. It uses almost an order of magnitude more power than your whole house uses.

That Class-8 uses more power to move 80,000 pounds than the little model-3, but charges in the same time, which means it pulls substantially more wattage off the grid to do it. (That's a necessity. There's absolutely no way around it. Putting more energy into requires that you put more energy into it.) That can be through higher amp draw, or higher voltage, but either way, it's more power coming off the grid. A grid that already suffers brownouts and blackouts due to excessive power consumption in the summer.

And that's just 1 class-8. To even think about half of the class-8's going all electric would be like doubling the wattage draw on the grid at peak. That would literally melt the wires feeding the grid. The grid itself would melt even if we had enough power production to get that much wattage out to the chargers.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

That's a bigger vehicle carrying a heavier load that can get around and recharge just fine. The first electric pickups (Rivian, Tesla, and the electric Ford F-150) are also coming out in the next year or two. Are you really arguing that all three companies are producing vehicles which will be nearly unusable?

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the US doesn't have an infrastructure that's capable of going all electric in the forseeable future. (40 years) It's already failing under the demands we've placed on it now. Thinking that we can raise that demand by an order of magnitude at peak and not have to make phenomenal upgrades is just lunacy.

This is where scale comes into play. A few electric vehicles are just fine. We can easily handle that. Get your new electric F150 or Model-X, or whatever. Doing it at such extremely small scales, like what's happened already, is freakisly easy. (Seriously, like 0.001% of our vehicles are EVs. It's such a small scale that it doesn't matter.) Going large scale, or full scale, is a totally different story. Our power plants can't produce enough energy to keep the grid up in the evening when everyone plugs in at home. It will crash the grid. We'd have to double our energy production, and upgrade the physical grid itself to even start to realize a large scale EV transition.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Or should you maybe stop and learn the bare minimums of what you are talking about (e.g. no EV chargers in NYC, can't fit chargers in parking garages, electric trucks impossible, etc) before 'debating' the issues?

A personal attack not worthy of a response.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

...and yet, these impossible vehicles already exist. Without the batteries filling up the bed of the truck. So, again, this just isn't true.

Rivian website
Electric F-150 hauling a train... full of gas F-150s

Well, if they had half a brain, they would simply point out that the train itself is electric. No need to get the F-150 involved. Trains are electrically driven. The train is a hybrid vehicle. The big diesel in it is just a generator to produce electricity for the electric motors that drive it.

How far do you think that thing can haul that train before the battery pack is completely depleted? Nowhere near as far as a diesel with a full tank.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Or a full size semi... using either multiple chargers or a single very large 'plug' that charges multiple batteries simultaneously.

Again, that's exactly the problem. The grid can't handle that at large scales. Multiple chargers when one charger already pulls the wattage of 9 houses? So each charging class 8 is pulling more power off the grid than a residential city block, and you still don't see the issue?

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Yes, converting from ICEs to EVs will require more electricity (though less total energy).

Now you're just factually wrong. The energy required to perform work doesn't change based on ICE vs EV. The exact same energy is required to move a set mass a set distance be it with internal combustion or electric motors. Electric motors don't do the same with with less energy. That's a physical impossibility. At best, you'll get some weight savings going to electric over a traditional drivetrain, but then you're doing less work, not the same work. You'll also get an efficiency boost, but you're still going to use the same energy to do the same work. Physics doesn't change just because you want it to.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Yes, we drive more than Norwegians. No, that isn't going to be a problem. New solar (or wind) capacity can be installed in a matter of weeks... months when financing and permitting are included (though individual projects can of course be delayed indefinitely if permitting is denied). We can and will build enough electrical capacity to cover our needs.

Yes, we can build enough electrical capacity. We can't do it in the forseeable future though because of the scale of the upgrades required. Putting up a few windmills and solar panels won't help you like you think it will. There aren't enough consistently windy areas, nor is solar power consistent enough with current technology. Solar and wind are great supplements to the grid, but they have diminishing returns. Solar does absolutely nothing for you overnight, which is when you're suggesting people charge their EVs.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

Apparently, you think I'm crazy. Electric vehicles will be GREAT for boondocking. That's the primary reason I'm looking forward to the electric trucks coming out. You will be able to run everything off the battery rather than having separate electric, gas, and propane systems.

Oh, so you'll drain those batteries even faster. Then you won't be able to go anywhere to charge up. That's a fantastic idea. You've definitely thought it through. Good job.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

As to how you charge while boondocking... how do you refuel while boondocking? Generally, you don't. You boondock as long as you can and when your resources run out you go get more. However, with EVs it might actually be possible. If you are boondocking "for weeks at a time" then you could use solar panels to slowly recharge the battery. Not feasible for daily commuting, but if you are sitting in place for two weeks you could do significant recharging.

Uh huh. Go ahead and believe that.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

The citation of radioactive half-life was, as explained, proof that you were incorrect in suggesting that a larger scale inherently leads to a slower rate.

That's not what I suggested. Scale matters in this particular comparison, not in every comparison possible. I've even given you reasons as to why it matters in this scenario.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

So... when you wrote, "Oil is here to stay." That was not anything even remotely close to "Oil is infinite and will always be available"?

Apparently words mean different things to you than they do to me.

By that logic, absolutely nothing is here to stay. The entirety of the universe will suffer heat death resulting in an effective end to even time itself. Should that phrase never be used then? Pfft, you know what that phrase means and so does everyone else. Stop acting like you don't just so you can argue.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

It is true that I have not backed up that claim. Indeed, I have not MADE that claim. First, Norway has NOT gone 100% EV in 10 years... they could get to 100% EV sales if current trends continue. Second, I don't believe that we will convert to EVs as quickly as Norway has. We obviously haven't done so to date... so unless we started converting FASTER than they are we won't be able to catch up. COULD we? Theoretically, but it would be harder for us to do and seems politically and culturally implausible.

And the US can't go 100% EV sales in 10 years because of the infrastructure problems. It isn't physically possible. We can't do what Norway did because of the scale. It's not a political or cultural issue. It's a physical issue. We have to change our infrastructure almost from the ground up to do what they did.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

That said, it also seems clear to me that we WILL convert to EVs very 'quickly'. The simple fact that every major automaker is working on EV versions of all their vehicles demonstrates that they believe a transition to EVs is imminent.

No, it shows that everyone wants a piece of the pie. If they thought it was imminent, they wouldn't be making ICEs anymore.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

The economic trends show that EVs will soon be cheaper to purchase. They are already cheaper to fuel and maintain. They perform better than ICEs in nearly every way... and are reaching the point where 'range' and 'charge time' are becoming non-issues.

No, we're approaching the point where charge ability is becoming an issue. As I've pointed out so many times, the grid can't just charge every vehicle you plug into it. It doesn't have the power to do it.

Originally Posted by CBDunkerson

How fast is 'quickly'? Political variables make it difficult to pin down, but I'd say that if anyone is buying a new ICE ground vehicle 20 years from now they are either going to be 'fossil fuel diehards' (e.g. like the 'incandescent light bulbs only' people) or want it for some niche application.

Yea, and back in the '90's we were supposed basically be living like the Jetsons by 2020. Where's all the robot butlers? Why don't we have AI yet? Where's my fusion reactor? Why can't I vacation on the moon? Why don't we have a Mars colony yet? Yea, we're always just 20 years from an unrecognizable world, but every 20 years, we look almost identical. Sure, there are some minor changes, but nothing significant. Once in a while there's a big change, but it never works out at rates like people say it will.

[NeilV]

Originally Posted by Itchytoe

Norway has about 5.5 million people and is smaller than California. The US is 30 times larger than Norway and has about 60 times the people. Just because something worked in Norway doesn't mean it can work in the US.

The US is just a lot of little Norway's and with most of the US being at a lower latitude than Norway it means that Solar is even more viable here in the US.

In Norway and Denmark they are even making the Electric Cars part of the Power Grid and have modified the cars to back feed the power they gathered from Solar into the Grid during peak hours. This makes it so the greater acceptance of EV's has reduced the need for more power stations by taking over some of the load instead of adding to it.

In those areas where EV's and Solar are seeing wide scale acceptance they are seeing electric rates dropping towards a 5 cents per kWh level.


The University of Colorado covered much of this in the Seba report which is a very interesting story to view.

[Mr.Mark]

Itchytoe's post above has to be the longest post I've ever seen.

I do like the 'back and forth' between the two guys. But, don't let it get too personal, you both have your opinions.

Living in California part-time for 30 yrs., I have seen things in other parts of the country that are so far behind. California is a leader.

Safe travels!
Mark

[F4Gary]

Originally Posted by Mr.Mark

Itchytoe's post above has to be the longest post I've ever seen.

And he was spot on.

[George Schweikle]

I am neither an EV supporter or hater, but references to EV sales in Norway don't seem to include the subsidies. See below for excerpts from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/30/norway-where-the-electric-tesla-has-become-the-budget-option.html (I added bold text)

"Norway is an oil-rich economy that does allow for high wages, but the real push toward luxury electric vehicles (EVs) has been made possible by a huge sales tax exemption.
Bent Erik Bakken, a senior principal scientist at the global assurance and risk management company DNV GL, told CNBC via telephone that Norwegian taxes on full petrol cars are about 100 percent, thus doubling the showroom price.
“So then you just take that away for electric vehicles and suddenly EVs in Norway are, on average, cheaper,” he said."

"Denmark illustrates why subsidies are not only important to EV growth but also retain existing market appetite. For a long time, electric car buyers were spared the 180 percent import tax that Denmark applies to vehicles fueled by an internal combustion engine.
Under pressure from traditional manufacturers, those tax breaks were originally set to be phased out from 2016 to 2020. But as soon as the new regime was introduced in the first three months of 2016, sales of electric vehicles dropped from nearly 2,500 units to just over 200.
Shocked by the drop-off, Denmark reversed course but said it would usher in a new post-subsidy era from 2019. The ultimate aim is to have a 100 percent tax on electric vehicles by 2022."