Maybe drape your EV car in the garage with this fire blanket.

I never thought of that part, but it makes sense. When I was still living in Illinois I was 2 miles out of town on a well system and the next house was a mile further down the road. I guess we were lucky in our area that for whatever reason we didn't have any runaway fires, but I'm sure that situation would have came up if that was the case.
What they do is set up temp holding tanks with heavy tarp like liners. Then either bring tankers in from other towns or pump out of the river or a local pond for big fires out here. One neighbor set his big empty lot on fire once with leaves and debris and called the fire dept. Cost him over $1500 for them to put it out. Should have just let it burn.
 
NO; that's false logic. (I saw your edit; my points below are germane to all and not pointed at you)

The mandated cost itself is for a product (the charger). Some don't want/need a charger. So why is it mandatory? Only a small percentage of the population would "need" a charger. Yet they are inducing the cost into all new homes.
- Do they mandate larger garages for tall, 4-door, long bed one-ton trucks? No, they don't.
- Do they mandate high-amp 240 circuits in the basement of every new home so someone who enjoys making pottery at home has a place to wire in their kiln? No, they don't.
- Do they mandate thicker 8" concrete floors and 12' ceilings in garages in new home construction, so that a future buyer, three decades from now, can have a 2-post car lift? No, they don't.
All these examples, and countless others, are based on the concept of use of a product that is only suppositional for potential use for the NEXT homeowner, not the one building the home currently.

One could argue that safety products, which would be applicable to ALL persons present and future, are reasonable. Smoke detectors and CO detectors, for example, can benefit ANYONE who resides in the home now and in the future. Those products are sensible.

But that's not what we're talking about here; a large 240v EV charger isn't a "necessity" for safety. Every EV I know of can charge on 110v; it just takes a lot longer. So the mandate of installing a dedicated EV product into every new home is one of draconian monarchy; "Thou shalt do so because I decree thee to buy this product."



That mentality of forcing a product into our lives based on the limited possibility of use down the road is one of dubious and arrogant thinking.
It's basically the same cost as putting in another dryer plug. It's an infintesimal portion of the cost of a new house that may be used for 100 years or more.
 
I wish we got more technical details on these fires than we currently get. Maybe the evidence is burned to a point that it's hard to figure out exactly where things went wrong.
 
What if Exxon-Mobil pushed every EV fire to the top of the news cycle? Edison was afraid of Westinghouse's better idea and killed an elephant to prove it.
ExxonMobil sells high tech products to battery makers, wind power blade makers, wind gear boxes, light plastics, tire liners that don’t leak, etc.
There are only 3 divisions and 1 is CCS - which will keep reliable sources of energy around to backup wind and solar …
 
Building code requires all combustible surfaces in a garage under house to be wrapped in fire code board and that the entry door leading to the house have a fireproof entry door.
I'm going through this now while building the retirement house, thinking of installing a dry chemical fire suppression system in the garage...don't own any EVs but the grandkids may not have a choice some day.
 
For a house it depends on your service that you have. Might mean if you have a 200A panel and it's not big enough you will have to go 400A. Bigger transformer may be a higher charge. Panel and wire would be. Then the electric co has to be able to deliver.
 
For a house it depends on your service that you have. Might mean if you have a 200A panel and it's not big enough you will have to go 400A. Bigger transformer may be a higher charge. Panel and wire would be. Then the electric co has to be able to deliver.
Why would a car charger require that much power? You’re not getting higher than 240V 48A with any home charger.
 
Why would a car charger require that much power? You’re not getting higher than 240V 48A with any home charger.
If you are already at 80% 200A service that will require an upgrade to 400A. Code calls for 125% of total load.
 
They also like to drive gas guzzlers, related to the oil industry and vote Republican. It's rare that none does not match that stereotype.

LoL. No. It's pretty easy to see this whole push was never ready for prime time and full grid support was never going to materialize which was the plan all along. It's a means to an end. Model 3 here.
 
If you are already at 80% 200A service that will require an upgrade to 400A. Code calls for 125% of total load.
That’s crazy. I don’t see how anyone would be actually using all that power at once. I guess I don’t have that crazy of tech in my house.
 
Maybe we should just combine all these silly anti-EV threads in to one forum. Then all the guys who hate them could find EV topics to rally around to entertain themselves-join hands and sing kumbaya....
 
That’s crazy. I don’t see how anyone would be actually using all that power at once. I guess I don’t have that crazy of tech in my house.
It's not what you use that you have to figure in when sizing an electrical system. Code requires everything to be considered at once as the base plus some safety margin. Been that way for decades but electrical services have been getting bigger for decades too. 200A was considered big back in the day, now it is standard. My house was originally the 4 fuse 60A service, with electric oven and range.
 
Back
Top Bottom