Slashdot Mirror
White House, 35 States To Boost Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (cnbc.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: The White House said on Thursday it will establish 48 national electric-vehicle (EV) charging networks on nearly 25,000 miles of highways in 35 U.S. states. The Obama administration said 28 states, utilities and vehicle manufactures, including General Motors, BMW and Nissan Motor, and EV charging firms have agreed to work together to jump-start the additional charging stations. The corridors were required to be established by December under a 2015 highway law. The White House said 24 state and local governments have agreed to buy hundreds of additional electric vehicles for government fleets and add new EV charging stations. California will buy at least 150 zero-emission vehicles and provide EV charging at a minimum of 5 percent of state-owned parking spaces by 2020. The city of Atlanta will add 300 charging stations at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport by the end of 2017. Los Angeles agreed to nearly triple the city's current plug-in electric fleet to 555 vehicles from about 200 by the end of 2017. Of those, 200 will be for the police department. The city is also adding another 500 stations by 2017. One hurdle to the mass adoption of EVs has been the difficulty in finding places to recharge vehicles. In July, the White House said it was expanding a federal loan guarantee program to include companies building EV charging stations. The U.S. Energy Department said in July that charging facilities are now an eligible technology for the program that can provide up to $4.5 billion in loan guarantees.
For those of you stuck on this worn Fox-News-meme, here's the fuller story:
Soon after O began his job in the White-house, he consulted top economists for solutions to the then quickly tumbling economy.
Looking at past stimulus plans and results from multiple countries, the economists suggested a stimulus had to be quick to be effective. "Big" infrastructure projects often take too long to ramp up. Surveys, plan review & approval, environmental studies, zoning studies, etc. have to be done first. These can take more than a year.
Therefore, the concept of "shovel ready" was created to only fund public works projects that could be ramped up quickly.
It turned out those are hard to come by. Some went to fixing potholes and the like, which I witnessed happening in my area, but otherwise they had difficulty finding quick-turnaround public works projects.
Instead, much of the stimulus was used to fund State budgets so that teachers, cops, fire-fighters, etc. would be less likely to be let go. This kept money flowing in the economy. Some also went to investments in green energy companies, such as solar. Sure, some went under, but investing is like that: win some loose some. To focus only on those that went under, like Solyndra, is cherry-picking evidence. (I will agree the investment selection process was poorly managed, though.)
It turned out the Great Recession went on longer than expected such that big public works projects would have been useful. But nobody has a crystal ball. The federal estimates of recession duration and depth were consistent with those made by private company estimates, I would note.
They were reasonable actions based on what was known at the time.
Some pro-austerity people claim that deep recessions fix themselves such that stimuluses are not necessary, but I've seen no evidence of this, other than making life so dreadful that people riot and war, which certainly stimulates economies, but kills.
Table-ized A.I.
I don't know, but you can be sure the energy dispensed through them will not come from the Middle East.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Your homework:
Google internal combustion engine efficiency.
Google electricity generation efficiency.
Google world power transmission loss.
Come back here with your answers, along with a conclusion, when you're done.
If you want to bias your results to soften your defeat, be sure to only consider coal generation.
For extra credit, research the following:
Vehicle emissions per kWh
Coal power plant emissions per kWh
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I recently did this calculation.
The amount of CO2 emitted per mile driving an EV assuming electricity is generated from coal is about the same as that from a gasoline car that does 40 mpg. How many cars do 40mpg in a real life mix of driving?
Yes, I ignored transmission losses, but perhaps that isn't fair because obviously gasoline gets from the refinery to your tank via zero energy teleport.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Why add lots of charging stations at airports? When people are leaving their cars for multiple days, they don't need a 240v charger or anything fancy. All that's needed is a simple electrical outlet. Even a Tesla could recharge fully in four days from a standard wall outlet. Put your level-2 charging stations in places where people shop or work and will only be parked for a few hours. Put the level-3 charging stations along highways where people need to charge quickly.
Of course, the need for public charging stations decreases as the range of the cars increases. When the standard range is over 200 miles, most people can do all their non-travel charging at home. You don't need chargers at shopping centers and offices (though I still hear about people with crazy 100+ mile commutes). The real challenge is charging for people who don't have a garage. Focus on putting chargers at apartment complexes and on city streets where residents without garages park. Require charging as part of the permitting process for new apartments (we just did that in my town).
Your leaving out the 2 biggest costs for electric cars.
1) Battery
2) Distribution and transmission.
Also tire/road wear, from cars that are 2* as heavy due to batteries.
These are not energy or carbon footprint neutral.
It is also a big drain on the environment building and maintaining the electric grid. Fixing all the lines that fail, and doubling the capacity to handle transportation will not be cheap, and costs more energy than what is lost in transmission.
Not to mention line workers is one of the 10 deadliest professions in the US. That is not counting all the people who die from accidents involving power lines.
Gasoline is not free to transport, but pipelines are generally safer and carry a much much higher density of power than power-lines. And costs about 1/5 that of power to transport per BTU.
If you did the math, original poster said they want a car that can go about 50 miles in under a ten minute charge. That is 25% more range than the average American drives in a day. That is approximately the same time you would spend in a gas station for an ICE car. Given you can charge at home, this would put the value proposition in favor of the electric car. So therefore every intelligent consumer would opt for an EV.
Now consider that we ALREADY have a car and charger that are better than these requirements. The Tesla Model S can charge 170 miles in 30 minutes on a SuperCharger. That's more than the original poster's request of 80% of 200 miles. (The overall range of the Model S is 315 miles. The range will go up at about 8% per year compounding --for at least a few years- as battery technology, etc. advances.)
So the only company with a charger with a high enough charge rate that its actually usable for highway travel, the only company with an existing charger infrastructure covering almost all highway routes across the nation, the only company that offers to license all of its patents on this technology to any and all manufacturers who would wish to use it as long as they share in the costs and the ethos of open access, isn't involved in this project?
sigh.
And the worms ate into his brain.
Federal and state support should be SAE J1772 with DC fast charge and force car makers into line. No CHAdeMO, no Tesla proprietary charge, no Mennekes. A single standard. It would also help if all charge points were required by law to accept common forms of payment and not be exclusive to one make or model of vehicle. i.e. charging should be like filling up a gasoline vehicle, not some vertical thing where charge stations only support certain brands of vehicles or discriminate against competitors.
That might inconvenience people with existing vehicles (they'll have to use cables) but the long term benefit is obvious. It removes a format war, risk of verticality / monopolies and increases consumer confidence in electric vehicles.
Other regions in the world like Europe might choose Mennekes with DC fast charge as their single format but the same point applies.
Please clarify.
Table-ized A.I.