Wherever their cars are parked, a charger can be put there, sort of like a parking meter. Nothing much different than going from walking or having a horse and wagon, to the invention of cars, roads, freeways, gas stations, etc.try to explain that to these people.
btw, 2/3 people in europe are living this way...
ford-teases-a-new-cable-capable-of-charging-evs-in-5-minutes
- Thread starter Leo99
- Start date
Was there a plan for the phaseout of asbestos, lead in gasoline, lead in paint, knob and tube wiring in houses?
Perhaps this is a yet larger change, maybe there needs to be more planning on a federal level, dunno. But for once it seems to me that automakers aren’t the ones arguing against a change, which is odd to me.
That's because the automakers see the EV craze increasing rapidly and want a piece of the market. And to start building EVs is an easier out then trying to meet every increasing stringent CAFE requirements put on ICE vehicles.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, asbestos phaseout and remediation was planned after it was discovered to be dangerous. Same with leaded gas, which was a pretty easy transition, along with leaded paint, which was just phased-out.
Knob and tube wiring still hasn't been remediated, I still have some sections of it in my home as do many others of the same vintage.
The thing with all of those issues is that they didn't require a fundamental and complete overhaul of an existing system, which EV's do, because they move the demand from one system (the fossil fuel delivery system, which has grown organically with the expansion of vehicles) to another, which is wholly unable to cope with that imposition as it currently stands. There needs to be a plan, and the lack of a plan, as has been demonstrated already in California, will not make EV adoption easier or more popular. People aren't going to be flocking to something if it wildly inconveniences them and if the grid is fragile and collapses, that's inconvenient.
This is a massive undertaking and it is going to require more than just a mandate and government hand waving to be properly executed.
I can make the case that Teslas are toys. I could have bought perhaps 2 Civics or Corollas, you name it, for the price of 1 Model 3.
I did not need another car, but I wanted to do something for my wife, who is a very knowledgeable high tech worker.
The Tesla plan is playing out: the first Roadster, the Model S, Model X, Model 3 and Model Y. Engineer and build Ca, where ther are resources and a market. The goal is to learn and develop the technology and to make money to develop the "Model 2", or everyman's EV.
Musk Secret Plan 2006
If someone drove an EV most of the time, but wanted to take a long distance trip and not deal with charging times, say once a year, they could rent an ICE car. Is this a perfect solution? Perhaps not, but people resist change; the reluctance to change. You see so much misinformation about these cars.
That's my 2 cents.
I’m certainly not “well off” being the sole provider for a family of 5 but I could swing a single Model 3 long range payment+insurance once my other 2 vehicles are paid off. We’re definitely also not “urban.” I do not agree with mandating electrics and phasing out ICE, but for the vast majority of people an electric car is more than enough for them to get to and from work and live their normal daily lives. The grid would obviously have to be able to cope with that, but ice and electric can coexist.
Exactly. Mention you want to buy a truck and it becomes “do you really need a truck? Just rent one when you need it! Go buy something more ‘practical’ or fuel efficient!” but suggest the same thing about renting ICE vehicles and ooohhhh boy.
The regulatory mandates we are discussing are not organic or incentivized adoption. It’s mandatory conversion and it’s incredibly harmful to the less affluent.
We’ve created a car dependent society and are now mandating adoption of vehicles not ready for the prime time. We essentially eliminate the ability for folks to make tailored decisions about the vehicles that they HAVE to own in order to participate in society.
Folks living on the left coast of California get their mandated renewable power, water, and food from far less affluent areas on the interior. But because their only interaction with those areas is when they drive through them on the I5 corridor to SF/LA or 80 on their way to Tahoe they effectively remain out of sight, out of mind. Any ill affects can thus be ignored or trivialized.
I would not be surprised gradually the powerlines will be upgraded or coded in new development to support more power, and more redundancy. Since there's already standard for industrial power, they will likely use that, which means 3 phases instead of higher voltage dual phases.
Trying to avoid politics but this is a fun fact: air pollution was a huge deal back in the 80s and prior, basically causing health problems in cities. Since you cannot mandate vehicle emissions or fuel quality you need to do it in a state regulation. Oh, there are cities in CA that you do not need smog check either, just, most cities have them because they had enough with pollution.
Also you remember EV1? That mandate of EV was gone, because it was not feasible and got lobbied away. If things are not going to work eventually lobbying will make it go away.
No doubt, but I'm not sure to what extent the government was involved with the phase out of lead in gas/paint and other things? other than tossing spaghetti at the wall and leaving it up to the various industries to cope. Similar to the emissions controls on cars--I'm sure they talked with the automakers, but in the end, "here's the due date, now show me you can't hit it."
I do think if the gov is truly interested in flipping the fleet over that they really need to start building nukes now. I don't know how long it takes to bring one online, but I'm guessing if they start now they might make their own deadline for the auto side of things.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Well, those problems were easily regulated with a ban, or a pending ban that allowed manufacturers to transition. The impact on the consumer was pretty minimal (other than some initial quality issues).
With BEV's, you are completely changing how things are done, it's a paradigm shift, so it's not as easily mandated, and there are a lot more moving parts.
And yes, I agree, the gov should be all over nukes but, as is typical with the US, they seem to be expecting private enterprise (like Gates/Buffet) to step-up and take care of the problem. We'll see how that goes I guess
The most rapid nuclear build-out in history was a public project executed by France.
Last edited:
I wish that were the case. As one who drives a lot, the reason I have 3 F150's is that rentals have become very problematic.
1) One way rentals no longer have just insane surcharges, they are often not allowed at all. I started renting cars round trip and dropping them off. HOLY MOTHER OF GOD that got expensive fast. Not only did the rental car companies (mostly Avis) charge me insane one way fees, but one (Hertz) also charged me employee time to reposition the car to a service center. Go rentals tried to charge me for damage that was clearly in my video before I took the car. Avis charged me for a totaled car, that I never rented!
2) Round trip rentals have gotten stupidly expensive. The days of putting on 3000 miles on a $299 rental car are long gone.
3) Car availability is hit or miss, with more miss than hit lately, especially with Hertz. Florida in the wintertime means one must reserve a car well in advance, and be willing to accept that it might not be available when you need it. And that what you get won't serve your needs. When you need to take Pax and rent an SUV or V large sedan, what you get is an Sonata or Jeep Compass or Nissan Kix. None of which make for good family or business travel vehicles.
when my old car died and was moved to scrapyard, i was thinking about being without car. (lol mr desperate)
several times buses screwed me (timetables were lying?) (you gotta take a few buses until you reach far destination)
when the first does not come at all, i guess you´re done for today
then i started to think about car rentals.
oh my lawd! after reading the fineprint i said- i rather walk 100km what a load of bloody clowns
several times buses screwed me (timetables were lying?) (you gotta take a few buses until you reach far destination)
when the first does not come at all, i guess you´re done for today
then i started to think about car rentals.
oh my lawd! after reading the fineprint i said- i rather walk 100km
what a load of bloody clowns
try to explain that to these people.
btw, 2/3 people in europe are living this way...
They will buy EV if they are taxed less, or they mandate certain area to be emission free (i.e. downtown) for air pollution reason, or even cheaper parking.
Don't forget when people live like this they don't need massive range. 300 miles is standard for US when we drive long distance, but in Europe you can go very far with 300 miles, maybe high speed rail is better.
In some places on earth the whole city state (i.e. Singapore) is less than 300 miles, in circumference. Same for Hawaii.
Some places.
The US has spent 70 years building communities that make Car ownership mandatory.
The US is not 300 miles across. EV’s don’t offer the flexibility of ICE for folks that have less Money than wealthy Bay Area shave the whales types.
If we really wanted to reduce emissions we should consider incentivizing urban planning that doesn’t involve using a car for everything. Instead we spend billions and billions of dollars on infrastructure that can only support more and more cars, creating places no one wants to be - only get through, and falling into the never-ending cycle of induced demand. Population growth makes that a losing bet.
Instead we ignore that infrastructure black hole, mandate EV’s, and stick our head in the sand when it comes to our woefully inadequate electric infrastructure.
But hey EV’s will solve everything according to the tech geek and granola head early adopters.
I'm not sure how to put it, in the grand scheme of things EV for the US market is going to be small eventually, in the long run the biggest incentives of EV come from nations with 1) no oil production, 2) pollution issue, 3) moderately urbanized (not too rural where range is an issue, not too urbanized where car is a burden).
China and Europe would likely consume up to 2/3 or more of most EV produced, and US would likely be way less, in families with more than 1 vehicle. Gasoline would still be around, but a lot of daily commutes would be done with EVs. Will we in the US ban gasoline? Probably never, because we have a lot of oil and we love suburb living with some rural life mixed in. The rest of the world would likely also never completely ban gasoline but only in "some" area (like we won't allow people riding a horse on the freeway and need permission to enter downtown with a horse).
If you think mandating EV / hybrid in certain areas is hard, imagine "fixing infrastructure" so we won't need a car for everything. Other than urbanization and discouraging suburb, it would likely not happen in the next 50 years. People love suburb housing with a yard and drive everywhere if they can afford to, the problem really isn't the cost of gas but more of traffic jam and EV isn't really going to change that too much.
Electrical grid problem will likely go away with time of use pricing (going to happen eventually after smart meter is popularized) and large enough battery capacity (so you can hold more than 1 day worth of commute and charge based on pricing). IMO the only way to fix a duck curve is big enough of a residential storage that "has to happen anyways". Inverter + battery for home solar is a waste due to round trip loss, but if you have EV that you need to charge anyways, it becomes a lot less wasteful. If you have DIY swappable battery you can plug into a wall socket while you drive, then you are going to be able to take advantage of every single hour, even during day time when you are driving your car. I really think this would be the eventual solution to duck curve, range, and battery cost (a major part is labor cost to build and swap the pack if it dies on the car).
My gripe with EV's currently is reduced range and charging speed in cold temps. I'm not talking about 30F average cold temps. Even in IA we often see many weeks when highs don't exceed single digit temps and often below 0F temps, as low as -25F. I've read that range is around 40-50% in extreme cold, 10%+ discharge over night to maintain battery temp and charging time is greatly increased. I've seen in those conditions even a level 2 home charger barely charges overnight and 110v chargers barely maintain. I have even seen some people say to only use the seat heaters to increase range, but try telling your wife that she can't run the heat because you'll sacrifice range....that won't go over well. lol
I could be wrong on some of those statements, please correct me if I am. I would love to see some real world experience with extreme cold temps and EV's that are not garaged or in a dethatched garage with no temp control. It's something I am always curious about.
In my area I don't see an EV paying off just to run around town, seems like a luxury purchase to me in my area. I much prefer Hybrids. Hard to beat a Camry Hybrid that gets 40+ mpg or 30+ mpg in a RAV4 Hybrid and not sacrificing anything like you do in a Prius. EV's have their place, but they aren't a replacement for ICE yet. Not to mention the power grid upgrades that has been previously discussed. Considering the average home uses 877kWh a month, it's hard to justify pumping 150kWh or more per car times hundreds or even thousands of cars in a community. To think that a Tesla Model 3 long range (82kWh) will use potentially the same amount of energy to power a house in 1 week is pretty power hungry, especially on our current electrical grid. As EV ownership increases, it will only draw more and more.
I could be wrong on some of those statements, please correct me if I am. I would love to see some real world experience with extreme cold temps and EV's that are not garaged or in a dethatched garage with no temp control. It's something I am always curious about.
In my area I don't see an EV paying off just to run around town, seems like a luxury purchase to me in my area. I much prefer Hybrids. Hard to beat a Camry Hybrid that gets 40+ mpg or 30+ mpg in a RAV4 Hybrid and not sacrificing anything like you do in a Prius. EV's have their place, but they aren't a replacement for ICE yet. Not to mention the power grid upgrades that has been previously discussed. Considering the average home uses 877kWh a month, it's hard to justify pumping 150kWh or more per car times hundreds or even thousands of cars in a community. To think that a Tesla Model 3 long range (82kWh) will use potentially the same amount of energy to power a house in 1 week is pretty power hungry, especially on our current electrical grid. As EV ownership increases, it will only draw more and more.
You make excellent points. Your use case is not a fit for a Tesla. Perhaps one day...
More like “scary“. As in, does my ICE burn through that much energy—if not more?
Many cities are already making changes to emphasize other forms of transit. In some cases you can start by re-striping roadways. Simple and cheap.
Throwing money into a black hole of incredibly expensive and ever expanding roadways that will never meet induced demand is a major reason why EV’s will not succeed. There are simply too many car trips being made. And every year means more and more are added.
There is neither the will power, nor money to continue to expand roadway infrastructure AND improve the electrical grid to support infinite EV growth. It’s a zero sum game. Something has to give.
