EV charging

[Foxfyre]

Converting to electric powered vehicles is a critical step toward reducing greenhouse gases and mitigating the effects climate change. If you don't agree with that statement there is no point in discussing whether goverment should be involved.

You know what? We have the greenest emissions right now than the world has seen for 200+ years and it has had negligible affect on the climate. If we did nothing re green energy and the worst case scenarios came true it would take a very long time before our planet became seriously affected much less uninhabitable.

Conversely, a large asteroid striking us could send us the way of the dinosaurs and currently is a far more real threat to Planet Earth than is climate change that has been happening since there was a Planet Earth. But we are putting little resources into protecting the planet against such an NEO and no resources into figuring out ways to help humankind adapt to inevitable climate change.

Considering the very real environmental impact of producing and refining and tooling the resources to build EVs and the fact that we don't have a power grid that could handle all those cars pulling a minimum of 7500 watts for the several hours it takes to charge an EV battery. And electricity does not produce electricity--it has to come from some other power source.

Let the free market work and we'll come up with something practical to replace fossil fuels at such time we have to have that.

 

[abu afak]

Considering the very real environmental impact of producing and refining and tooling the resources to build EVs and the fact that we don't have a power grid that could handle all those cars pulling a minimum of 7500 watts for the several hours it takes to charge an EV battery. And electricity does not produce electricity--it has to come from some other power source.

Let the free market work and we'll come up with something practical to replace fossil fuels at such time we have to have that.

As I said earlier in the thread, The Power Grid is increasingly Renewable/green as well.
13.6% is now Wind and Solar, and growing like crazy.
The Vast majority of New USA Generation is Renewable.. 85%
`

 

[Foxfyre]

As I said earlier in the thread, The Power Grid is increasingly Renewable/green as well.
13.6% is now Wind and Solar, and growing like crazy.
The Vast majority of New USA Generation is Renewable.. 85%
`

Electricity can be a matter of life and death to many people. And for it to be effective in the entire country to move power from the wind and sun rich west to the wind and sun starved east will require up to three times the transmission lines that we now have.

Individually owned wind and solar would be unaffordable for most Americans without heavy federal and state subsidies and those subsidies, if continued, would run into the trillions if everybody goes wind and solar. Not to mention 20% higher insurance costs if solar panels are on every roof.

And frankly when you have heart monitors, oxygen generating machines, CPAPs etc. dependent on electricity, I don't want to trust only wind and solar for a power supply when the fossil fuel industry is shut down and there's no fuel for a backup generator.

 

[abu afak]

Electricity can be a matter of life and death to many people. And for it to be effective in the entire country to move power from the wind and sun rich west to the wind and sun starved east will require up to three times the transmission lines that we now have.

Individually owned wind and solar would be unaffordable for most Americans without heavy federal and state subsidies and those subsidies, if continued, would run into the trillions if everybody goes wind and solar. Not to mention 20% higher insurance costs if solar panels are on every roof.

And frankly when you have heart monitors, oxygen generating machines, CPAPs etc. dependent on electricity, I don't want to trust only wind and solar for a power supply when the fossil fuel industry is shut down and there's no fuel for a backup generator.

I share your concern and am not demanding 100%, or 90%, or even 80%.
I'm think 50-60% Renewables can be reached without too much pain and and WITH Saving money.. as it's doing now.
(ie, IOWA is 63% wind and solar. Wind turbines are going crazy in the farm/plains states and they are enriching farmers and ranchers)
With better tech, which will enevitably come in the next few years.. a bit higher Yet.
With a mainly NG back up/balance.

I started a thread to discuss it:

How much of the Mix can Renewables be?​

How much of the Mix can Renewables be?

50-80% looks very possible to me. After that, it's very tricky. We have been adding renewables in Vast majority last 5 years: 2/3 (2016) - 85% (2021). How much of the mix is possible/can they ultimately be.. how soon. I posted this pair years ago as part of my series of the most Major issues in...

www.usmessageboard.com

`

 

[Foxfyre]

I share your concern and am not demanding 100%, or 90%, or even 80%.
I'm think 50-60% Renewables can be reached without too much pain and and WITH Saving money.. as it's doing now.
(ie, IOWA is 63% wind and solar. Wind turbines are going crazy in the farm/plains states and they are enriching farmers and ranchers)
With better tech, which will enevitably come in the next few years.. a bit higher Yet.
With a mainly NG back up/balance.

I started a thread to discuss it:

How much of the Mix can Renewables be?​

How much of the Mix can Renewables be?

50-80% looks very possible to me. After that, it's very tricky. We have been adding renewables in Vast majority last 5 years: 2/3 (2016) - 85% (2021). How much of the mix is possible/can they ultimately be.. how soon. I posted this pair years ago as part of my series of the most Major issues in...

www.usmessageboard.com

`

I am all for wind and solar but that done by the private sector and not forced on us by the government using our money to force us.

And Iowa is a mid-sized state with 1% of the national population. And so far no green energy company is self sufficient but those staying in business rely on massive government subsidies and even with those subsidies many, like Solyndra, fail after a relatively short time in business.

We really need to rethink all this now before the government steps in it so deep we can't reverse disastrous policies that will accomplish little or nothing to affect climate change.

 

[abu afak]

I am all for wind and solar but that done by the private sector and not forced on us by the government using our money to force us.

And Iowa is a mid-sized state with 1% of the national population. And so far no green energy company is self sufficient but those staying in business rely on massive government subsidies and even with those subsidies many, like Solyndra, fail after a relatively short time in business.

We really need to rethink all this now before the government steps in it so deep we can't reverse disastrous policies that will accomplish little or nothing to affect climate change.

re 1% IOWA.
How about (9%, #2 USA population) Texas which I beleieve is now at 28%, and getting the Conservative Oil state Governor mad.

"...[Texas] produces More wind and solar power today than the Next Three states (California, Iowa, and Oklahoma) combined, and that lead is growing.
Last year Texas added more new renewable power generation than the next Five states Together. The American Clean Power Association, a trade group representing wind-, solar-, battery-, and hydrogen-energy developers, recently testified that renewables projects have invested $93 billion in Texas during the past couple of decades and generated $684 million combined in lease payments to landowners and taxes to counties and school districts.

One recent estimate found that renewables Lowered the cost of electricity to Texans by $11 billion last year, or $423 for every customer served by the state’s predominant power grid. Over the past five years, Texas has added 2,800 jobs to support wind and solar power generation at the same time that the state has lost 44,000 oil and gas extraction jobs, in part because automation has allowed producers to drill more wells while employing fewer roughnecks."..."
The abundance of low-cost clean energy—a growing priority for global corporations—has also driven companies to put new facilities in Texas."...""

The Texas GOP’s War on Renewable Energy​

What’s behind the Legislature’s relentless campaign against wind and solar power, which are saving Texans billions?
`

 

[jc456]

Outside of the initial investment costs in a solar energy system, there is no cost to charge an electric vehicle at home using solar. Every time you plug your EV into a fully solar-powered outlet, it recharges using electricity at no cost.

the amount of stupid in your statement is fabulous. I couldn't find more stupid anywhere else in the forum.

 

[jc456]

I am all for wind and solar but that done by the private sector and not forced on us by the government using our money to force us.

And Iowa is a mid-sized state with 1% of the national population. And so far no green energy company is self sufficient but those staying in business rely on massive government subsidies and even with those subsidies many, like Solyndra, fail after a relatively short time in business.

We really need to rethink all this now before the government steps in it so deep we can't reverse disastrous policies that will accomplish little or nothing to affect climate change.

all the land is free......weeeeeeeeeeeeeee I'm a warmer weeeeeeeeeee freeeeeeee, freeeeeeee, freeeeee I'm laughing still.

 

[Foxfyre]

all the land is free......weeeeeeeeeeeeeee I'm a warmer weeeeeeeeeee freeeeeeee, freeeeeeee, freeeeee I'm laughing still.

That's the saddest side to all this. Those on the left think saving $ with wind and solar is all savings and don't consider what the cost is elsewhere both practically, in environmental impact, in actual costs.

Innovation in the private sector is controlled by cost vs return ratios, availability of raw materials and labor, finished components, effectiveness and marketability.

The government never looks at it that way. Is usually tunnel visioned sometimes looking only at what they say is the intent and sometimes whatever limited results they can find or manufacture. But the government almost never considers the big picture, never put the unintended consequences or lack of results into the equation.

And we all should be fully aware that cost is no factor to the U.S. Government these days. They consider it all theirs, confiscate as much from us as they dare to take lest we not keep them in power and then they print whatever else they want to spend regardless of how much debt they pile up.

And if what they do does not affect the climate in any way who cares? They'll just promise some mythical pipe dream on down the road and continue to exercise as much control over we the people as they can grab.

I don't have all that much longer left to live so I probably won't see the worst of all this if Patriots are not able to turn it around and make it sane. But you younger folks are going to reap the whirlwind big time and have to live with it because they will have destroyed the infrastructure that keeps this country strong, free and prosperous.

 

[Magnus]

the amount of stupid in your statement is fabulous. I couldn't find more stupid anywhere else in the forum.

Whew, Thank you. My greatest fear is some retard like you thinks I'm smart. That is the day, I have to quit this site.

 

[jc456]

Whew, Thank you. My greatest fear is some retard like you thinks I'm smart. That is the day, I have to quit this site.

oh fk dude, you'd be the last on that list. Congrats.

 

[Flopper]

You know what? We have the greenest emissions right now than the world has seen for 200+ years and it has had negligible affect on the climate. If we did nothing re green energy and the worst case scenarios came true it would take a very long time before our planet became seriously affected much less uninhabitable.

Conversely, a large asteroid striking us could send us the way of the dinosaurs and currently is a far more real threat to Planet Earth than is climate change that has been happening since there was a Planet Earth. But we are putting little resources into protecting the planet against such an NEO and no resources into figuring out ways to help humankind adapt to inevitable climate change.

Considering the very real environmental impact of producing and refining and tooling the resources to build EVs and the fact that we don't have a power grid that could handle all those cars pulling a minimum of 7500 watts for the several hours it takes to charge an EV battery. And electricity does not produce electricity--it has to come from some other power source.

Let the free market work and we'll come up with something practical to replace fossil fuels at such time we have to have that.

There is no scientific evidence that an asteroid is going to send us the way dinosaur but there is plenty of evidence that climate change caused by rising greenhouse gases levels are a threat to our way of life. We are only starting to see those changes which will gradually increase through the end of this century and almost surely will continue for centuries to come. Conversion to EVs will certainly help mitigate climate change but it will not stop it. We will have to adapt. The amount of adaption is going to depend on what we accomplish in this century.

The power grids can support all EV charging needed to convert all autos and small trucks to EVs. The problem is not the grids. We will have to change the way we manage the power grids. Currently states limit sales to grids and 35% of our power plants in the country are not connected to grids. Access to regional grids vary by state. There are also legal limitations within the grids that prevent energy from flowing where it is needed. With increasing generation of power by solar cells and wind and better management of the grids we should be able to avoid building any new power plants to support EVs till after 2050 when 30% of the vehicles and light trucks are projected to be EVs. In the second half of the century we will probably need more power plants but the number will be dependent on growth of EVs and alternative power generation.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no scientific evidence that an asteroid is going to send us the way dinosaur but there is plenty of evidence that climate change caused by rising greenhouse gases levels are a threat to our way of life. We are only starting to see those changes which will gradually increase through the end of this century and almost surely will continue for centuries to come. Conversion to EVs will certainly help mitigate climate change but it will not stop it. We will have to adapt. The amount of adaption is going to depend on what we accomplish in this century.

The power grids can support all EV charging needed to convert all autos and small trucks to EVs. That is not the problem is not the grids. We will have to change the way we manage the power grids. Currently states limit sales to grids and 35% of our power plants in the country are not connected to grids. Access to regional grids vary by state. There are also legal limitations within the grids that prevent energy from flowing where it is needed. With increasing generation of power by solar cells and wind and better management of the grids we should be able to avoid building any new power plants to support EVs till after 2050 when 30% of the vehicles and light trucks are projected to be EVs. In the second half of the century we will probably need more power plants but the number will be dependent on growth of EVs and alternative power generation.

There are people who SAY there is scientific evidence that climate change caused by AGW is threatening our way of life but almost all of those have jobs, incomes, positions, reputations, credentials that DEPEND on them saying that. The person who questions AGW is generally forced out in a hurry.

Most scientists whose jobs, reputation, income etc. do not depend on them saying that aren't saying that.

Almost all government, education, scientific institutions, MSM, social media, entertainment, and big business is now controlled by those on the hard left and these can severely limit what the average American is allowed to see or hear. And of course what they want us all to hear is that climate change is our largest existential threat. (Or maybe it is second behind white supremacy depending on who you talk to.)

But I also see people who have zero reason to lie about it say they've seen data manipulated to produce a certain conclusion, data omitted that would change perspectives of conclusions, etc. etc. I see the 'scientific' predictions come and go again and again and again with nothing happening and they just move the goal posts further into the future.

It is getting far more difficult for the average citizen to get all information necessary to have an informed opinion now that Google, Edge, et al are severely limiting what their search engines produce for us to see.

I see that despite the intense efforts to go green, green and greener, those efforts have made not one whits' difference in the climate.

I see most of those leading the charge to combat climate change almost universally living their personal lives as if nothing at all was happening with the climate. That makes it really hard to believe they are honestly concerned.

All this convinces me that we should keep studying the issue but we are seriously misdirecting funding and policy when what we should be doing is helping people improve their lives in the climate that exists and be developing ways for us to adapt to an inevitably changing climate with minimal disruption of lives and quality of life.

Certainly forcing people to prematurely give up fossil fuels as they are currently doing is a certain prescription to increase massive poverty and misery around the world. And I'm more and more confident that climate change presents far less of an immediate challenge to human kind than does that asteroid. The odds are way in favor of the asteroid.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no scientific evidence that an asteroid is going to send us the way dinosaur but there is plenty of evidence that climate change caused by rising greenhouse gases levels are a threat to our way of life. We are only starting to see those changes which will gradually increase through the end of this century and almost surely will continue for centuries to come. Conversion to EVs will certainly help mitigate climate change but it will not stop it. We will have to adapt. The amount of adaption is going to depend on what we accomplish in this century.

The power grids can support all EV charging needed to convert all autos and small trucks to EVs. That is not the problem is not the grids. We will have to change the way we manage the power grids. Currently states limit sales to grids and 35% of our power plants in the country are not connected to grids. Access to regional grids vary by state. There are also legal limitations within the grids that prevent energy from flowing where it is needed. With increasing generation of power by solar cells and wind and better management of the grids we should be able to avoid building any new power plants to support EVs till after 2050 when 30% of the vehicles and light trucks are projected to be EVs. In the second half of the century we will probably need more power plants but the number will be dependent on growth of EVs and alternative power generation.

The power grids can support all EV charging needed to convert all autos and small trucks to EVs.

Link?

 

[Flopper]

Electricity can be a matter of life and death to many people. And for it to be effective in the entire country to move power from the wind and sun rich west to the wind and sun starved east will require up to three times the transmission lines that we now have.

Individually owned wind and solar would be unaffordable for most Americans without heavy federal and state subsidies and those subsidies, if continued, would run into the trillions if everybody goes wind and solar. Not to mention 20% higher insurance costs if solar panels are on every roof.

And frankly when you have heart monitors, oxygen generating machines, CPAPs etc. dependent on electricity, I don't want to trust only wind and solar for a power supply when the fossil fuel industry is shut down and there's no fuel for a backup generator.

Electricity can be a matter of life and death to many people. And for it to be effective in the entire country to move power from the wind and sun rich west to the wind and sun starved east will require up to three times the transmission lines that we now have.

Individually owned wind and solar would be unaffordable for most Americans without heavy federal and state subsidies and those subsidies, if continued, would run into the trillions if everybody goes wind and solar. Not to mention 20% higher insurance costs if solar panels are on every roof.

And frankly when you have heart monitors, oxygen generating machines, CPAPs etc. dependent on electricity, I don't want to trust only wind and solar for a power supply when the fossil fuel industry is shut down and there's no fuel for a backup generator.

It is very unlikely that we will be solely dependent on solar and wind by the end of this century for power generation. Some generation will be by fossil fuels. And most likely by the end of the century we will be able to build large scale fission reactors for generating electricity. The fuel can be heavy hydrogen easily extracted from sea water. Unlike fossil fuels this fission reactor's by-produce is helium which is an inert gas that is non-polluting. non radioactive and it is not a greenhouse gas.

Since we have developed three regional grids, east, midsection, and west in the country with many grids in the states, electric energy is not dependent on any single generation. the challenge is to connect all grids and all power plants so energy can flow to anywhere it is needed. This is a management problem.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It is very unlikely that we will be solely dependent on solar and wind by the end of this century for power generation. Some generation will be by fossil fuels. And most likely by the end of the century we will be able to build large scale fission reactors for generating electricity. The fuel can be heavy hydrogen easily extracted from sea water. Unlike fossil fuels this fission reactor's by-produce is helium which is an inert gas that is non-polluting. non radioactive and it is not a greenhouse gas.

Since we have developed three regional grids, east, midsection, and west in the country with many grids in the states, electric energy is not dependent on any single generation. the challenge is to connect all grids and all power plants so energy can flow to anywhere it is needed. This is a management problem.

And most likely by the end of the century we will be able to build large scale fission reactors for generating electricity. The fuel can be heavy hydrogen easily extracted from sea water. Unlike fossil fuels this fission reactor's by-produce is helium

Fusion.

 

[Flopper]

The power grids can support all EV charging needed to convert all autos and small trucks to EVs.

Link?

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/can-the-nations-electrical-grid-support-electric-cars

 

[Flopper]

And most likely by the end of the century we will be able to build large scale fission reactors for generating electricity. The fuel can be heavy hydrogen easily extracted from sea water. Unlike fossil fuels this fission reactor's by-produce is helium

Fusion.

thanks, i reverse them

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/can-the-nations-electrical-grid-support-electric-cars

I didn't see anything in that link about how much extra capacity we'd
need to power all those new EVs.

 

[Foxfyre]

To Flopper and everybody else, I have been consistent that I think research and study is great and we should do that re all aspects of Planet Earth, climate, the universe around us as is reasonable to do.

I also say that there is very little that the government has forced on us that didn't have as many or more serious negatives as it has had positives. And there is no reason to believe that forcing green energy on us with no more evidence than we have that it is necessary for ANYBODY could have disastrous consequences.

By all means experiment with EVs. And if profitable to do so, make them available to those who want them. But let good old fashioned capitalism and the free market do it. naturally and as opportunity presents itself. Keep the government out of it as much as possible.

I predict that the the government ramming this down our throats will almost certainly end very badly and it could be at tremendous cost in loss of human liberties, choices, option, opportunitys and at great cost in human suffering.