An Energy Question?

[Trakar]

A very well thought out and important thread. To bad such discourse can't be had in the halls of Congress.

More often and more publically!

There is a broad range of valid public policy positions and decisions that that need to be explored and discussed so that the electorate can make reasoned decisions.

 

[Old Rocks]

That is indeed the problem with todays politics. The rhetoric in the halls of Congress all too often sounds like a reading of the National Enquirer, than reasoned discussion. On both sides of the aisle.

We have a couple of real problems coming down the road. Energy costs, particulary the cost of imported energy.

And our reaction and preperation for the inevitable consequences of the GHGs that we have put into the atmosphere. The fires, droughts, storms, and floods of the last three years should be a heads up for all.

 

[flacaltenn]

While the debate rages on both sides about such things as wind,solar, nuclear, nat-gas, oil, and a whole host of other energy sources, it leads me to ask a question. At what point does this debate become harmful to this nation? let me explain, by picking and choosing what technology is good and what is bad are we not then putting our feet at the throat of American innovation and as a by-product of that American Jobs ?

Take the Chevy Volt for instance, while not everyone's cup of tea, and perhaps a little pricey amongst other things, I'm frankly stunned that Americans especially in todays economy and todays global atmosphere that some would be so against this car just on the off chance it is associated with a political figure they dont happen to like.

The same is true for domestic oil and gas production and solar, and wind, if we as a nation intend to stay at or near the top then we have to have the energy sources to do so. To produce, explore, and make the products needed for this here in this nation can serve only one purpose, it makes this nation stronger and less dependant on nations that do not have our best interests at heart.

While it's true that some of these new technologies might take time and even some might fail before it becomes a part of our daily lives , that is the cost we pay to take that path and realize the benefits of those technologies. Take for instance the auto industry, at it's inception there were over a 100 different companies producing cars in this nation, and over the years as the technology grew , companies came and went. In short no matter what the technology, if we STOP innovation then we choose long road to decline.

Well stated! Sooner or later oil as a source of fuel for our mobility machines will end. We can either deal with it at that point, which would be catrophic or we can slowly deal with it now! I see the electric car as the long-term solution. First, stationary sources have a much wider variety, easier to harness, more efficient and are evolting all the time. The mobile sources are virtually just oil. We need to break that.

This first generation of electric car definitely has it flaws: Price, range, availability and variety. However, they show great promise. They show that it can be done. Nonetheless ALL new and civilization changing technology has this cycle in the first generation.

Two examples: The computer and Cell Phone. The computer used to be vastly expensive. It used to take up a full room. The only ones who had them were the government and rich companies. Then they started to shrink them. You had the naysayers fighting it pointing to type-writer and quicker, less bugs and cheaper. Slowly but surely more and more people obtained them. Now they are mainstream and the typewritter is extinct.

The Cell was very similar. The first generation came along with a bag. It cost $5 a minute to use. Only wealthy businessmen used them. Naysayers again said they were too costly and stationary phones were more efficient. Nowadays, most people in the world, even in Afghanistan, have cell phones!

This first generation has it's flaws, but people bought everything that was produced. The next generation will work on SOME of the flaws (I guarantee the Volt drops the gas engine) and get the price down and even more people will buy them. The third generation will perfect the electric car and nearly all new cars will be electric.

The trend starts now and will move in that direction. Critized it yes, but still acknowledge this is the hope for the future!

I'm not against the Volt TECHNOLOGY -- I'm against the mixed message that motivates our politicians to be SUBSIDIZING IT.. Because I bet NONE of you will answer the question I've asked many times before about EVs..

Should we be ENCOURAGING the adoption of EVs and pushing folks to add 2.5KW circuits to their homes to charge them because there's no LACK of electrical power to worry about?

OR

Do we have to be constantly chastized to turn down the thermostats, unplug our phone chargers, and swap out all our bulbs to conserve every last drop and discourage additional growth of the grid?

Right now -- the enviro-left is pushing BOTH agendas hoping that the dissonance of the mixed message is entirely missed.

The reason there's fall-out in the solar and wind industries and massive consolidation of the number of players is EXACTLY that they are mature technologies and DO NOT require any further subsidies for COMMODITY items. Funding for R&D is a different issue. Solyndra failed because their little optics gimmick failed to add any incremental to the standard Solar PV product..

We cannot pump up the grid with sources are subject to severe siting restrictions, and sporadic reliability.. Can't design a society around energy sources that are gonna check out next Tuesday for 8 hours.

It's realism that needs to be discussed on a political level -- we've been pushed into "hope and dreams" maybes for WAAYYY too long now..

Personally, I think wind/solar ought to be reserved for OFF-GRID production of Hydrogen to support a fuel cell fleet. And we ought to start with a fast approval process leading to 150 new nuclear plants before the decade is out.

THEN -- we can talk about what problems get solved with plug-in EVs..

 

[Trakar]

I'm against the mixed message that motivates our politicians to be SUBSIDIZING IT.. Because I bet NONE of you will answer the question I've asked many times before about EVs..

Should we be ENCOURAGING the adoption of EVs and pushing folks to add 2.5KW circuits to their homes to charge them because there's no LACK of electrical power to worry about?

"Add 2.5KW circuits"? what are you talking about? The average US home already draws about 11.5MWh of power/year, that's almost 1000KWh per month. If you draw an additional 2.5KWh a day charging your EV that's only another ~80KWh per month, or an additional 8% electrical usage/draw. Now don't mistake my words, I'm not saying that local, regional and national grids don't need updating, upgrading and overall improvement,...just the opposite. In fact, I have long advocated that this needs to be a first step immediate action that shouldn't be controversial or partisan. Heck, it doesn't even require you to accept the realities of AGW, all you need to do is look at the growth of our power usage over the last 50 years and project that parabola forward. That and realizing that our electrical infrastructure is a patchwork of grids and systems that were largely inadequate 20 years ago and haven't been much improved, yet alone expanded over that time frame.

With regards to energy, I'll reserve carbon tax/bank and other policy issue discussion for another post. Nuclear power should and will play an expanded role in our nation's energy independence and long-term sustainability. Gas can help us transition to a carbon neutral society. Solar, wind, hydro (especially in northern mountainous areas as increasingly wet climes provide a bountiful potential to tap for energy needs), geothermal, tidal/wave/current all have expanding roles to play. As the technologies mature and settle into their roles we can increasingly allow the gas and eventually the nuclear to be replaced as they are retired by newer alternative/sustainable energy replacements. A plan along these general lines can sustain a growth of energy usage and achieve carbon neutrality within a half century. I, personally, don't think that's enough to seriously diminish or eliminate dangers and problems AGW is bringing, but it will give future generations the best shot possible to adapt within and absorb the early and initial changes and problems and still have the capacity and resources to chart their own future.

OR

Do we have to be constantly chastized to turn down the thermostats, unplug our phone chargers, and swap out all our bulbs to conserve every last drop and discourage additional growth of the grid?

Right now -- the enviro-left is pushing BOTH agendas hoping that the dissonance of the mixed message is entirely missed...

What type of confusion leads to the thinking that conservation and efficiency shouldn't work hand-in-hand with the smart development, growth and expansion of a sustainable national energy plan?

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm against the mixed message that motivates our politicians to be SUBSIDIZING IT.. Because I bet NONE of you will answer the question I've asked many times before about EVs..

Should we be ENCOURAGING the adoption of EVs and pushing folks to add 2.5KW circuits to their homes to charge them because there's no LACK of electrical power to worry about?

"Add 2.5KW circuits"? what are you talking about?

Sorry --- I spaced out. The Nissan Leaf recommends a 9.2KW circuit be added to charge and estimates an 7hr charge time to fill a 25KWhr battery stack

73mi range .34KwH/mile.. 25Kwh battery.

Q
If I want to "prewire" a new home for a future Nissan LEAF™ owner, what is required?
A The home charging dock will require a 220/240V 40 amp dedicated circuit connected to a breaker. The charging dock will need to be hard-wired directly to the circuit by a certified electrician.

What is the estimated time for full charging with 110v, 220v and fast charge stations?
A It takes about ~30 minutes to 80% at a 480 volt quick-charge station. Starting from a depleted battery, ~7 hours at 220/240V (depending on amperage), about 20 hours at 110/120V.

For 100 miles, you are ACTUALLY burning the equivalent of 1.17 DAYS of electricity for the typical US household. NOT COUNTING the charging inefficiencies which based on the Nissan electrical service recommendations might be pretty damn high. So let's conservatively say 1.4 days of typical house demand per 100 miles.


The average US home already draws about 11.5MWh of power/year, that's almost 1000KWh per month. If you draw an additional 2.5KWh a day charging your EV that's only another ~80KWh per month, or an additional 8% electrical usage/draw. Now don't mistake my words, I'm not saying that local, regional and national grids don't need updating, upgrading and overall improvement,...just the opposite. In fact, I have long advocated that this needs to be a first step immediate action that shouldn't be controversial or partisan. Heck, it doesn't even require you to accept the realities of AGW, all you need to do is look at the growth of our power usage over the last 50 years and project that parabola forward. That and realizing that our electrical infrastructure is a patchwork of grids and systems that were largely inadequate 20 years ago and haven't been much improved, yet alone expanded over that time frame.



Yeah -- So --- why are we encouraging adding 1.4 days of household usage every 3 or 4 days between charges? I take it we agree there are problems to solve before we do California type brainless mandates on numbers of EVs in a state that currently can't reliably power a semiconductor plant in Silicon Valley.

With regards to energy, I'll reserve carbon tax/bank and other policy issue discussion for another post. Nuclear power should and will play an expanded role in our nation's energy independence and long-term sustainability. Gas can help us transition to a carbon neutral society. Solar, wind, hydro (especially in northern mountainous areas as increasingly wet climes provide a bountiful potential to tap for energy needs), geothermal, tidal/wave/current all have expanding roles to play. As the technologies mature and settle into their roles we can increasingly allow the gas and eventually the nuclear to be replaced as they are retired by newer alternative/sustainable energy replacements. A plan along these general lines can sustain a growth of energy usage and achieve carbon neutrality within a half century. I, personally, don't think that's enough to seriously diminish or eliminate dangers and problems AGW is bringing, but it will give future generations the best shot possible to adapt within and absorb the early and initial changes and problems and still have the capacity and resources to chart their own future.

Add to that a 2 -->3 Gton CO2 offset for reforestation and we mostly agree on that. Geothermal/ Tidal are gimmicks and NOT enviromentally compelling at all to me. There ARE no green alternatives -- only supplements.

OR

Do we have to be constantly chastized to turn down the thermostats, unplug our phone chargers, and swap out all our bulbs to conserve every last drop and discourage additional growth of the grid?

Right now -- the enviro-left is pushing BOTH agendas hoping that the dissonance of the mixed message is entirely missed...

What type of confusion leads to the thinking that conservation and efficiency shouldn't work hand-in-hand with the smart development, growth and expansion of a sustainable national energy plan?

When you're encouraging SOME folks to add 15 -->> 25% to their home usage by charging EVs on our challenged grids, while DEMANDING that I pull every 1W charger out the wall --- SOMEBODY'S wasting time and energy promoting conservation. Doesn't put me in the mood to comply when everyone is groveling for their share and SAFEWAY gets to keep their neon lights and freezers on all night long.

Bottom line is -- Energy should be CHEAP and PLENTIFUL --- not RARE and EXPENSIVE. Because I don't want the lights in the library to go off when no one is moving around the room.

We meet somewhere in the middle -- but you didn't really answer my simple question.. Which effort are we wasting time and money on until we define the problem?

 

[Politico]

The Volt is still based on fossil fuels. And a lot of pollution is created making the batteries for them. They cost too much, the benefits don't outweigh the negatives and they apparently catch fire for no reason. All that aside it comes down to the consumer. And until they make something that performs the same as gas powered vehicles people are not going to buy them.

 

[flacaltenn]

The Volt is still based on fossil fuels. And a lot of pollution is created making the batteries for them. They cost too much, the benefits don't outweigh the negatives and they apparently catch fire for no reason. All that aside it comes down to the consumer. And until they make something that performs the same as gas powered vehicles people are not going to buy them.

Actually a lot of good innovations in EV tech. And generally, there HAS been reasons for the Volt catching fire.

But you're correct about the side effects. Like asking what problem we're solving with them when a coal fired plant is providing the charge. Or what we're gonna do to handle an unprecendented HUGE waste stream from the batteries..

 

[Trakar]

I'm against the mixed message that motivates our politicians to be SUBSIDIZING IT.. Because I bet NONE of you will answer the question I've asked many times before about EVs..

Should we be ENCOURAGING the adoption of EVs and pushing folks to add 2.5KW circuits to their homes to charge them because there's no LACK of electrical power to worry about?

"Add 2.5KW circuits"? what are you talking about?

Sorry --- I spaced out. The Nissan Leaf recommends a 9.2KW circuit be added to charge and estimates an 7hr charge time to fill a 25KWhr battery stack



For 100 miles, you are ACTUALLY burning the equivalent of 1.17 DAYS of electricity for the typical US household. NOT COUNTING the charging inefficiencies which based on the Nissan electrical service recommendations might be pretty damn high. So let's conservatively say 1.4 days of typical house demand per 100 miles.


The average US home already draws about 11.5MWh of power/year, that's almost 1000KWh per month. If you draw an additional 2.5KWh a day charging your EV that's only another ~80KWh per month, or an additional 8% electrical usage/draw. Now don't mistake my words, I'm not saying that local, regional and national grids don't need updating, upgrading and overall improvement,...just the opposite. In fact, I have long advocated that this needs to be a first step immediate action that shouldn't be controversial or partisan. Heck, it doesn't even require you to accept the realities of AGW, all you need to do is look at the growth of our power usage over the last 50 years and project that parabola forward. That and realizing that our electrical infrastructure is a patchwork of grids and systems that were largely inadequate 20 years ago and haven't been much improved, yet alone expanded over that time frame.



Yeah -- So --- why are we encouraging adding 1.4 days of household usage every 3 or 4 days between charges? I take it we agree there are problems to solve before we do California type brainless mandates on numbers of EVs in a state that currently can't reliably power a semiconductor plant in Silicon Valley.

With regards to energy, I'll reserve carbon tax/bank and other policy issue discussion for another post. Nuclear power should and will play an expanded role in our nation's energy independence and long-term sustainability. Gas can help us transition to a carbon neutral society. Solar, wind, hydro (especially in northern mountainous areas as increasingly wet climes provide a bountiful potential to tap for energy needs), geothermal, tidal/wave/current all have expanding roles to play. As the technologies mature and settle into their roles we can increasingly allow the gas and eventually the nuclear to be replaced as they are retired by newer alternative/sustainable energy replacements. A plan along these general lines can sustain a growth of energy usage and achieve carbon neutrality within a half century. I, personally, don't think that's enough to seriously diminish or eliminate dangers and problems AGW is bringing, but it will give future generations the best shot possible to adapt within and absorb the early and initial changes and problems and still have the capacity and resources to chart their own future.

Add to that a 2 -->3 Gton CO2 offset for reforestation and we mostly agree on that. Geothermal/ Tidal are gimmicks and NOT enviromentally compelling at all to me. There ARE no green alternatives -- only supplements.

OR

Do we have to be constantly chastized to turn down the thermostats, unplug our phone chargers, and swap out all our bulbs to conserve every last drop and discourage additional growth of the grid?

Right now -- the enviro-left is pushing BOTH agendas hoping that the dissonance of the mixed message is entirely missed...

What type of confusion leads to the thinking that conservation and efficiency shouldn't work hand-in-hand with the smart development, growth and expansion of a sustainable national energy plan?

When you're encouraging SOME folks to add 15 -->> 25% to their home usage by charging EVs on our challenged grids, while DEMANDING that I pull every 1W charger out the wall --- SOMEBODY'S wasting time and energy promoting conservation. Doesn't put me in the mood to comply when everyone is groveling for their share and SAFEWAY gets to keep their neon lights and freezers on all night long.

Bottom line is -- Energy should be CHEAP and PLENTIFUL --- not RARE and EXPENSIVE. Because I don't want the lights in the library to go off when no one is moving around the room.

We meet somewhere in the middle -- but you didn't really answer my simple question.. Which effort are we wasting time and money on until we define the problem?

Time is not unimportant.

The longer we wait before beginning to take action (especially since 90% of the actions are ones that make sense to both our energy present and future without issues of AGW to add urgency to our path) enhances the problems we face (or more specifically, the problems our descendents will face) the more expensive and extensive the problems will be. I'm not saying that there isn't time for more analysis and a thorough discussion of options and choices, but we do know enough to lay out the early impacts and begin these discussions of initial foundational steps. The early impacts are already unfolding, if we wait until things get really bad before we start taking serious actions, we'll be too busy plugging breaches in the too small, too weak storm wall to go back and simultaneously try to lift everyone's home and business up on stilts. (admittedly poor analogy).

 

[Indofred]

I find it really hard to understand why people don't save energy in whatever ways they can.
All my light bulbs are energy savers except two.
The last two are because I'm upgrading to even lower power consumption LED units.
Exactly the same light but even less energy use.

My two cars are a mountain bike and a 110cc Yamaha scooter.
The first sails past petrol stations without the slightest thought of filling up, the second uses about a gallon every week or two.

It's true my carbon footprint is small but the cash leaving my wallet is even smaller.
I'm on about 16 times minimum wage so I could do when the hell I liked but I chose to save energy and save cash for more useful things.

Sounds like a personal set of fiscally conservative lifestyle choices I can respect.

I'm from Yorkshire.
It's a place where we don't spend anything we don't have or want to.
Back in the UK, I used biofuels in my van.
The weather forced me to mix with pump product but, if I bought rancid veg oil from the Chinese supermarket, I could run the thing at 10 times less fuel cost in summer.
I only had the van at all because I had to for my business.

That makes sense in anyone's wallet.

Before I got married, I only used laptop computers and a portable DVD player.
I really didn't see the advantage in having a TV as I never watched broadcast programs.

When energy saving bulbs were first available, various schemes were around, giving away free bulbs so you could try one.
I stopped at every place I passed and got as many as I could for bugger all.

My electricity bill was tiny.
It was so low, the electricity company sent a bloke out to see if I was fiddling the meter.

Ok, I'll go with being "Green" but I think of my wallet first.

 

[polarbear]

I see the EV as another means of independence for the home owner. The combination of solar, grid tied, and an EV gives you not only energy for your home and vehicle, but also a good backup in case of a grid failure. It also puts power on the grid at the time of greatest need, and takes power off in the slack period.

And I agree as to it also being a bridge technology. The ability that will be developed in storing high density electrical energy will lead to developments we cannot even imagine now. One could hardly have predicted the internet from the invention of the transistor in the late 1940's.

First about the Chevy Volt and then to your "EV power backup"
I guess it`s news to you, that the Chevy volt production has been cancelled...here is why...:
The Volt Re-Evaluated: $250,000 Per Car | Conservative News, Views & Books
You claim you are a millwright, yet you sit every day all day long at your PC and post crap like that. If you are not an outright fake then you faked a disability and suck on the system like most of the people of your stripe do. How else would you find the time to do what you do?
If you were in fact a millwright You`ld know how much the hardware for solar per KVA really costs even if You install it yourself to make it a viable power backup system. In another post you bragged how "only the technically challenged" would have a DIY problem to install a solar grid tie system. As if somone like you, who hasn`t even the foggiest notion what a SCR-Capacitor voltage doubling system or a "stair case" wave generator is would be able to DIY a grid tie for solar or wind.
I do and I did my own from the ground up, 3000 Watts solar + 1500 Watts wind. It`s a nice hobby and that`s all it is, because if the grid fails and you want to rely on that you either hope for the sun to shine or the wind to blow just right. Although I use 6 deep cycle marine batteries it doesn`t take long till my freezers + the other appliances suck them down and then I start up my 6.5 KVA Hyundai which was only a fraction of the cost of the solar panels and after that I don`t really care if the power is out all night and the following day:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bbDxOCpatA&list=UUvj7dbOY14kt_MFIR1Y1iwA&index=1&feature=plcp"]Sturmangriff.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

 

[flacaltenn]

PolarBear --- You've probably saved some lives today from folks who would heed Rock"s advice about DIY Power generation.. I'd rep ya if I could..

While you're at it -- (i'm tired of dealing with the used solar salesman) -- could you explain to him how his plan to put up a couple KWatts of solar to charge your electric vehicle just doesn't comply with the manufacturers' warning to have a COMPETENTLY installed and dedication 230V, 40A service to run the Nissan Leaf charger??? (or you could wait 20 hours (3 solar days) and charge it from 110V)

I'd like to see that 20KW arrray on HIS roof --- wouldn't you?

Any minute now --- watch --- the guy is gonna show up and accuse me of not knowing what "grid-tied" means.. To him grid-tied means --- it's somebody ELSE'S problem where the energy comes from AT NIGHT when he's charging his EV...

 

[Middleoftheroad]

I see the EV as another means of independence for the home owner. The combination of solar, grid tied, and an EV gives you not only energy for your home and vehicle, but also a good backup in case of a grid failure. It also puts power on the grid at the time of greatest need, and takes power off in the slack period.

And I agree as to it also being a bridge technology. The ability that will be developed in storing high density electrical energy will lead to developments we cannot even imagine now. One could hardly have predicted the internet from the invention of the transistor in the late 1940's.

First about the Chevy Volt and then to your "EV power backup"
I guess it`s news to you, that the Chevy volt production has been cancelled...here is why...:
The Volt Re-Evaluated: $250,000 Per Car | Conservative News, Views & Books
You claim you are a millwright, yet you sit every day all day long at your PC and post crap like that. If you are not an outright fake then you faked a disability and suck on the system like most of the people of your stripe do. How else would you find the time to do what you do?
If you were in fact a millwright You`ld know how much the hardware for solar per KVA really costs even if You install it yourself to make it a viable power backup system. In another post you bragged how "only the technically challenged" would have a DIY problem to install a solar grid tie system. As if somone like you, who hasn`t even the foggiest notion what a SCR-Capacitor voltage doubling system or a "stair case" wave generator is would be able to DIY a grid tie for solar or wind.
I do and I did my own from the ground up, 3000 Watts solar + 1500 Watts wind. It`s a nice hobby and that`s all it is, because if the grid fails and you want to rely on that you either hope for the sun to shine or the wind to blow just right. Although I use 6 deep cycle marine batteries it doesn`t take long till my freezers + the other appliances suck them down and then I start up my 6.5 KVA Hyundai which was only a fraction of the cost of the solar panels and after that I don`t really care if the power is out all night and the following day:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bbDxOCpatA&list=UUvj7dbOY14kt_MFIR1Y1iwA&index=1&feature=plcp"]Sturmangriff.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

WOW. That article about the volt was arguably the stupidest article I have ever read, and I didn't even bother to finish it. Even they admit their math is completely faulty. First lets assume that no more Volts will ever be sold again (what?) so that makes 6k (we are already over that mark) then we assume that every possible company will get every possible subsidy (not going to happen) and then we will add in the entire cost of the GM bailout (how does that even remotely make sense). Also we are not going to factor in any way that the Volt saves money, because that would lower our number, and we are only using numbers that raise the number.

Bravo. Dumbest article ever.

 

[Indofred]

My energy costs run at about US$40/month including home and transport.

Who is daft here?

 

[RGR]

The Volt is still based on fossil fuels.

and because we have plenty of them around you think...we should stop?

And a lot of pollution is created making the batteries for them. They cost too much, the benefits don't outweigh the negatives and they apparently catch fire for no reason. All that aside it comes down to the consumer. And until they make something that performs the same as gas powered vehicles people are not going to buy them.

They don't cost any more than the median car in America, they catch fire (weeks later) when you smach them together at speed...then stand back and wait a week or two...and I guarentee you that I can road rage someone beside me at a stoplight in a pretty authoritative fashion and yes...some of us have bought them. You should take one for a spin, they are quite nice!

 

[RGR]

Bravo. Dumbest article ever.

Nah. Some of the fracking posts and articles and ideas have been even dumber.

 

[flacaltenn]

My energy costs run at about US$40/month including home and transport.

Who is daft here?

fred:

not being judgemental here,, but my family and I LIKE to travel together in something larger than a scooter and I run a home office with 2200 sq ft of complex electronics equipment. I'd say that my life is completely blissful, I'm glad you're happy with yours.

I'm happy for you..

 

[Old Rocks]

PolarBear --- You've probably saved some lives today from folks who would heed Rock"s advice about DIY Power generation.. I'd rep ya if I could..

While you're at it -- (i'm tired of dealing with the used solar salesman) -- could you explain to him how his plan to put up a couple KWatts of solar to charge your electric vehicle just doesn't comply with the manufacturers' warning to have a COMPETENTLY installed and dedication 230V, 40A service to run the Nissan Leaf charger??? (or you could wait 20 hours (3 solar days) and charge it from 110V)

I'd like to see that 20KW arrray on HIS roof --- wouldn't you?

Any minute now --- watch --- the guy is gonna show up and accuse me of not knowing what "grid-tied" means.. To him grid-tied means --- it's somebody ELSE'S problem where the energy comes from AT NIGHT when he's charging his EV...

Dumb fuck still doesn't understand grid parrallel. A real engineer

 

[Indofred]

My energy costs run at about US$40/month including home and transport.

Who is daft here?

fred:

not being judgemental here,, but my family and I LIKE to travel together in something larger than a scooter and I run a home office with 2200 sq ft of complex electronics equipment. I'd say that my life is completely blissful, I'm glad you're happy with yours.

I'm happy for you..

I'm sexually aroused by the thought of 2,200 sq ft of complex electronics.
I have a small 'cool'lection of electronics as well but not that complex.
All, just in case you were wondering, are low energy devices.

What do you use that lot for?

 

[Old Rocks]

I see the EV as another means of independence for the home owner. The combination of solar, grid tied, and an EV gives you not only energy for your home and vehicle, but also a good backup in case of a grid failure. It also puts power on the grid at the time of greatest need, and takes power off in the slack period.

And I agree as to it also being a bridge technology. The ability that will be developed in storing high density electrical energy will lead to developments we cannot even imagine now. One could hardly have predicted the internet from the invention of the transistor in the late 1940's.

First about the Chevy Volt and then to your "EV power backup"
I guess it`s news to you, that the Chevy volt production has been cancelled...here is why...:
The Volt Re-Evaluated: $250,000 Per Car | Conservative News, Views & Books
You claim you are a millwright, yet you sit every day all day long at your PC and post crap like that. If you are not an outright fake then you faked a disability and suck on the system like most of the people of your stripe do. How else would you find the time to do what you do?
If you were in fact a millwright You`ld know how much the hardware for solar per KVA really costs even if You install it yourself to make it a viable power backup system. In another post you bragged how "only the technically challenged" would have a DIY problem to install a solar grid tie system. As if somone like you, who hasn`t even the foggiest notion what a SCR-Capacitor voltage doubling system or a "stair case" wave generator is would be able to DIY a grid tie for solar or wind.
I do and I did my own from the ground up, 3000 Watts solar + 1500 Watts wind. It`s a nice hobby and that`s all it is, because if the grid fails and you want to rely on that you either hope for the sun to shine or the wind to blow just right. Although I use 6 deep cycle marine batteries it doesn`t take long till my freezers + the other appliances suck them down and then I start up my 6.5 KVA Hyundai which was only a fraction of the cost of the solar panels and after that I don`t really care if the power is out all night and the following day:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bbDxOCpatA&list=UUvj7dbOY14kt_MFIR1Y1iwA&index=1&feature=plcp"]Sturmangriff.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

As usual, BiPolar, you are full of shit.

2013 Chevy Volt now available (randomly)

GM said last month that the 2013 Volt boosted its all-electric range by three miles – to 38 – compared to the 2012 version while increasing its miles-per-gallon-equivalent rating by four to 98 MPGe. GM also said the Volt's battery capacity increased to 16.5 kilowatt hours from an even 16.

2013 version or not, Volt sales are on the upswing. GM sold 8,817 of them through the first six months of the year, more than three times the number from this point in 2011.

 

[Old Rocks]

Note how the 'Conservatives' are absolutely livid over the idea that a homeowner can free himself from dependence on the big energy companies. Could it be that they like and desire servitude?