Slashdot Mirror
Californians Have Now Purchased Half a Million EVs (arstechnica.com)
According Veloz -- an electric car industry group -- electric vehicle sales in California hit a cumulative 512,717 since 2010. "Months of strong U.S. sales in 2018, preceded by a strong 2017, are starting to show a trend: electric vehicles are selling well, especially in places where there are strong monetary and non-monetary incentives to buy them," reports Ars Technica. From the report: "Overall, this year has seen exponential growth in electric car sales," Veloz wrote. "Electric cars accounted for 7.1 percent of California car sales in the first three quarters of the year, with fully electric, zero-emission car sales outpacing plug-in hybrid sales 4.1 percent to 3 percent respectively." Veloz's data tallies not just fully battery-electric vehicles but also plug-in hybrids as well as the much rarer fuel cell vehicles. The group gets its data (PDF) from the blogs InsideEVs and HybridCars.com as well as a market-research firm called Baum & Associates and estimates from the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
According to data from InsideEVs, the Tesla Model 3 was the top-selling electric vehicle model in the U.S. in November. In November alone, 18,650 of those vehicles were sold in the U.S. To its credit, Veloz's press release isn't too self-congratulatory. The group writes, "Veloz recognizes that, while electric car sales are increasing at a rapid clip, it is not happening fast enough to achieve the deep cuts in emissions that the state needs to achieve to protect people's health and curb negative impacts on the environment."
According to data from InsideEVs, the Tesla Model 3 was the top-selling electric vehicle model in the U.S. in November. In November alone, 18,650 of those vehicles were sold in the U.S. To its credit, Veloz's press release isn't too self-congratulatory. The group writes, "Veloz recognizes that, while electric car sales are increasing at a rapid clip, it is not happening fast enough to achieve the deep cuts in emissions that the state needs to achieve to protect people's health and curb negative impacts on the environment."
one could speculate that timeouts in space could be remnants of earlier versions of us who sucked the life out of their planet & it imxploded for lack of lubrication etc..? leaving a 'cloud' of whatever they were trying to breathe at the last,, looks like carbon from here? leaving our circumstances precariously repetitive? cease fire stand down there are mothers & children in every town.. truth+mercy=justice.. thanks again
If the electricity to charge electric vehicles comes from dirty sources, how are they cutting emissions?
Just eyeballing the sales graph, it looks like adoption rate is about doubling every two years or so. Should these trends hold then next decade electric cars will pretty much take over.
"Exponential" is a term of art, and one that is pretty much guaranteed to not apply to markets since there's no room for endless expansion. Demand will top off at some point near the total number of driver's licences in ciruclation. The increase rate will have been on the decline well before that, in fact will have gone negative. Thus, at best you get logistical growth: A slow begin, a steep increase, then a slowing down and a topping-off. And that, is not "exponential growth".
The answer is that they're not, they're just pretending while actually increasing emissions... elsewhere. This is a common theme in much-ballyhood "green" initiatives. The fact your comment is getting negrated again says that pretense is more important than actually caring about the environment, at least to some people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_Norway says Norway has 275,000 EVs in a population of just 5.25M.
Don't take this wrong, I think it's great that EVs are taking off. Keep up the good work.
(And BTW, I'm waiting for demand for gasoline to drop sufficiently that prices start dropping. I have a couple of "classic" 60s muscle cars that aren't cheap to fill up.)
and done been gettin on to rakin! A rakin republican is a good republican.
So the USA taxpayer has paid about $4 billion in subsidies so that rich people can have another new car. Woo Fucking Hoo. MAGA. (/. warning to snowflakes, there may be sarcasm).
It's mandated by law. CARB (California Air Resources Board) runs a ZEV mandate. Each year, automakers have to sell a certain percentage of zero emissions vehicles. The formula is a bit complex (it also includes partial ZEVs like hybrids and plug-in hybrids). But the quota for 2018 is 2.5% ZEVs. For 2025, it will be 8%.
Every automaker has to sell this percentage of ZEVs. If they fail, they have to buy credits from an automaker who exceeded their quota. If they fail that, they are banned from selling cars in California. And since about a half dozen states representing nearly a third of the U.S. population automatically adopt CARB's guidelines, the automaker would be banned from selling cars to a third of the U.S.
No automaker wants to be cut off from a third of the U.S. market. So they will do whatever it takes to meet the mandated ZEV percentage for the year. If that means running crazy sales and incentives (VW offered a 3 year/30,000 mile lease on an eGolf for $49/mo $1500 down, or $79/mo zero down a few years back), then so be it. In other words, the sales numbers do not represent true market demand. The ZEV mandate means if not enough EVs are being sold to meet the quota, automakers will discount EV prices until it does. (This is also why the best EV deals are in California - only EVs sold or leased in California count towards the ZEV mandate.)
That said, real demand seems to be meeting or exceeding the mandated percentage the last couple years, since I haven't seen a repeat of the crazy year-end sales and incentives. But this isn't a metric you can reliably use to gauge real demand. As the mandated ZEV percentage gets higher, it becomes harder for automakers to subsidize their prices to meet the mandate if there's insufficient demand (the discount for each EV has to be amortized over fewer ICE vehicles). So if the mandated percentage outstrips demand by too much, it'll create a situation where it'll be cheaper for Californians to buy an ICE vehicle out-of-state and bring it in, rather than buy it in California. Thus skewing the official sales figures further from real demand.
Coal fired cars no less! Bringing back jobs to the coal industry!
Funny, all the time he lied to Fox News and they repeated the lies, and all that time Putin knew about the lies. Putin knew about Trump tower Moscow, he knew the funding was from VTB a sanctioned spy bank. Trump's lies were to his base, not to Putin.
And Fox News? Will they put their country before their Trump affiliation? No. Once he roped them into small lies that became bigger lies, that became huge lies, they'll locked in now.
California is one of the few states where it is clear that they're exhausting their state's ability to support population growth. Yet the state at all levels continues to pull for as many immigrants as they can get. Doesn't matter whether they're legal or illegal, California wants them! All of the water-related stresses are a sign that this situation is not maintainable going forward under their current attitudes.
If they were serious politically, they'd be building metro systems left and right that connect whole cities and their suburbs. They'd push through SLAPP-like laws that allow the state to punish NIMBYism and environmental activists who sue without a damn good reason. There is a lot the state could do within its budget to build practical solutions to protect its environment, but there are only a few politically-acceptable solutions that don't risk goring a sacred cow.
I'd be much more interested in them abolishing fossil fuel subsidies - $22 trillion a year is a LOT of your money and mine.
I'd also be interested in seeing light rail and quality bus services mandated in all cities, with city centres pedestrianized or made locals only, as has happened in parts of England.
Getting people out of cars is more important than getting them around with less pollution.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
This is proof that California is populated by a bunch of leftist hypocrites.
Only 500k EVs? Every last goddamn one of those bitch-ass hypocrites ought to have run out and bought one by now.
The Red Sticker for the car pool lane went backwards.
Yellow sticker = hybrid (now not valid)
Green sticker = plugin hybrid and pure electric (not valid 2019)
White sticker = pure electric (not valid 2019)
Red sticker = new plugin hybrid and pure electric
So the red sticker pulls a hundred thousand EV's off the road, and replaces them with a mix of hybrids and new electric vehicles.
What exactly is the red sticker trying to encourage. Just new sales?
Is there any correlation between the cali wild fires and the number of EVs that are sold?
... vehicular infrastructure is paid for. As a larger percentage of vechicles eschew fossil fuels, there needs to be a better way to fund road and highway improvements than fossil fuel taxes.
The half million EV's since 2010 are kinda offset by the fact that California's population has increased by 1.5 million since 2010.
Meters will be mandatory on all home chargers. You will be taxed per charged.
CA already is itching to tax per mile driven.
Watch for huge battery disposal fees.
Public charging stations will charge more than electricity and will be taxed per kilowatt.
Fancy way of crying, "Nuh Uh!"
Your assertiond to the contrary require your own set of citations.
Coal is such a red herring regardless, as it's been dying, keeps dying, and there's not realistically anything that's going to save it.
Sadly I wouldn't be so fast to erect a tombstone on coal just yet. Several reasons:
1) Coal is incredibly abundant in the US (we are the Saudi Arabia of coal) and abundant supply tends to equal cheap
2) Never underestimate a strong political lobby regardless of the absurdity of their positions (see NRA)
3) Lots of idiot voters in the US who think money (regardless of source) is more important than breathable air and habitable climate
4) Solar and wind are coming on strong but aren't a slam dunk obvious economic choice just yet
5) We don't have anything that can fully replace coal in the next 50 years aside from nuclear and nuclear is a political dead end.
6) Partisan politics in Washington on the right that is suspicious of anything favored by "those hippies on the left" regardless of actual merit
Thanks Rei for the update.
Just eyeballing the sales graph, it looks like adoption rate is about doubling every two years or so. Should these trends hold then next decade electric cars will pretty much take over.
Beware naive extrapolation. Electric cars are definitely not going to "take over" in just 10 years. It's going to take longer than that for the supply chain to develop to supply the batteries and power trains and to reconfigure the assembly lines even if the demand was there already which it definitely is not. Average age of a car on US roads is longer than a decade so it would take longer than that even if starting tomorrow we only sold electric cars. Not to mention there are issues with range and fast charging and charging infrastructure and grid updates that have yet to be fully resolved.
I could see electric cars conquering major market share within 2-3 decades and I think there will be a strong uptake in demand in the next 10 years but it's going to be a while before they really conquer the market.
Phase them out. 2025 no more high mpg cars and vans. 2030 no more high mpg trucks and buses. Then make it illegal to drive them 5 yrs later without a special yearly license.
So the USA taxpayer has paid about $4 billion in subsidies so that rich people can have another new car. Woo Fucking Hoo. MAGA. (/. warning to snowflakes, there may be sarcasm).
You mean instead of the $20 billion we spend each year on direct fossil fuel subsidies? (never mind the indirect ones like lack of pollution controls which are MUCH larger costs) Globally fossil fuels are directly subsidized to the tune of about $5 TRILLION per year.
By your idiot logic NASA exists so rich people can joy ride in space. Maybe consider that there is a bigger picture goal to benefit us all that you have failed to comprehend. Sometimes subsidies actually do make sense because we all benefit in the long run. Not everything is a zero sum game.
Personally I would like my daughter to be able to breathe the air 80 years from now and to not have to ride around in loud, messy vehicles built with 19th century technology. Digging up all the carbon in our soil and releasing it into the air is quite literally suicidal.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j...
Yet, beyond power rates 45% above the U.S. average, California has another problem that makes it less of a model than some proclaim. California now imports 33% of its electricity supply from fast growing neighbors, with about 65% of that coming from the Southwest and 35% coming from the Northwest. These numbers increase most in summer months when air conditioning loads peak. Imports have been rising rapidly: in 2010, California "only" imported 25% of its power.
It's good that they are going EV, but they are the ones that complain about the rest of the nation. But who are they getting a third of their electricity from? The deplorable s.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
After having driven an EV, my feeling is that the death knell for the ICE in ordinary can already be heard. The technology is already there, and can do nothing but improve.
The problem in America is, people still don't see EVs as cost-effective, practical alternatives to internal combustion engine vehicles in most cases!
That's something you can't fix by waving a one time tax credit at people, and really shouldn't attempt to do by mandating purchasing behaviors.
It's just the fact that EV technology still has to mature, like ALL technologies do. Your early adopters pay the premium prices that help fund mass-market viability.
(I can remember back in the early 1990's, paying over $1,200 for an internal CD burner drive. It was an HP 4020i, and only burned media at a 2x maximum speed. Now, you can buy these things off the shelf for about $25 and they record single or dual layer DVD as well as CD media at speeds of up to 52x! But back then, I had a real need for it and could justify that price. Most people couldn't.)
Electric cars still present some big challenges, like practically none of them existing yet that in a pickup truck or van format. If you need to make longer road trips, you barely have any viable options EXCEPT for Tesla, because they're the only one with a fast supercharging network that's built out well enough. (The GPS in the car automatically takes you to the nearest one when you won't make it to a destination otherwise, etc.) And we still barely even have any of America's gas stations on-board with adding EV charging at their locations! If American adopted EVs in any serious way, all of a sudden? There would be huge lines and people stuck waiting hours to recharge their vehicles, and cars with dead batteries stranded all over our roads.
The Federal Government subsidizes each electric car to the tune of seven thousand dollars. That means California residents have taken over 3.5 billion dollars in federal subsidies for their cars at YOUR expense! Congratulations suckers!
IF I lived in California, I wouldn't imagine I needed to drive anywhere else either. Back here though, I do want to drive to other places in the country and EVs aren't sufficient enough for that yet, and too expensive to be a second car.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
So, for every sale since 2010, they've sold as many EV's in California as are sold in a few days by any of the big-name vehicle manufacturers.
Even if you multiply that up by 50 states and then 200+ countries, they're still a drop in the ocean.
"Months of strong U.S. sales in 2018, preceded by a strong 2017, are starting to show a trend: electric vehicles are selling well,"
If that's "strong" and "selling well", then someone needs to go look at the numbers.
Half a million in eight years, 62500 cars a year... In a state that has 28 million registered vehicles. Less than one quarter of one percent.
It all puts me in mind of very primitive peoples... One, Two... Many!
Numbers count (I know, bad pun). Just because the number SEEMS large to the average mind, doesn't mean it really is in the larger scheme of things.
Everyone stand on ocean beach and spit. That will raise sea level!... In a million years.
US taxpayers are paying subsidies so that our children don't end up all dying of lung cancer and other pollution-related diseases. Yeah, it's pretty awful. Go suck on a tailpipe.
I don't respond to AC's.
The problem in America is, people still don't see EVs as cost-effective, practical alternatives to internal combustion engine vehicles in most cases!
Go see what other things Americans have been established to be wrong about, NASA budgets, foreign aid, foreign relations, even their own religion, and you stop giving a crap about that problem.
You always have the option of renting a gasoline car for long trips, and in most two car families you can have one gas vehicle.
Did you count the scooters and skateboards?
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
That's not much of an option. I take my current ICE places instead of flying specifically because I don't like renting a vehicle and dealing with those agencies. Besides, if I bought a price-inflated EV with the thought that the electric fills will save me money why would I throw that all away on renting a vehicle?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
"Overall, this year has seen exponential growth in electric car sales," Veloz wrote. "Electric cars accounted for 7.1 percent of California car sales in the first three quarters of the year, with fully electric, zero-emission car sales outpacing plug-in hybrid sales 4.1 percent to 3 percent respectively."
Californian's might not be as progressive as they think they are. In Norway it is predicted that 45% of all cars sold in 2018 where electric. And in the capital Oslo, 47.9 percent of all cars on the road are electric.
California will be the test market for seeing how well a " driving " tax works vs the fuel tax that is in place today.
California has the highest taxes on fuel in the country coming in around ~70 cents / gallon when all taxes are accounted for.
California accounts for ~10% of total fuel usage in the Nation ( it's a big State with a lot of folks in it )
California uses about ~15B gallons of gas per year
Without having to do the math, as the number of vehicles on California roads using gasoline drops, so too does the tax collected
on gasoline sales. The short term fix will be to raise the fuel taxes even higher ( which will mostly impact those who can't afford EV's,
GJ ! Let's stick it to the poor people lol ) but, in the end, they'll have to switch to another option if they want to keep funding the highways
and all the infrastructure that goes with it.
As a result, a " distance driven " tax will likely be introduced in the not too distant future. It will either be an odometer check yearly when you
have to renew your registration, or it will be via some other means ( like GPS ).
So, good job for lowering your consumption but be prepared for what is likely coming because of it.
I am really beginning to think people should be required to be licensed in STEM subjects before being allowed to post on the Internet.
That' funny. You wouldn't believe some of the horseshit I've heard from licensed engineers when they want to "prove" a point. And I've seen engineers fooled by numbers: there's this religion among engineers that numbers are always right and they've had to have come from somewhere! Of course, it never occurs to them that it came out of someone's ass.
I once saw an analysis by an engineer (lot's of impressive multivariable calculations!) that there isn't enough solar energy falling on the Earth to meet humanity's needs. It took two seconds for an astronomer to point out that the value that he used for solar output was off by a factor of a few million. The engineer got the number from a global warming propaganda website.
A STEM degree or license in one is no guarantee of rational or honest discourse or thought.
Just the fact that many engineers believe in God is a prime example of that.
Honest question, I don't mean actual infrastructure as in power station, power lines, transformers etc, though those are obviously critical but what are EV manufacturers doing on top of just creating EV's?
Tesla has their supercharger network but I don't see any equivalent from Chevrolet, Ford, Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW etc. If I buy an EV from anyone other than Tesla, the *only* places I can charge is:
- At home. Assuming I have the ability to hook up a Level 2 or 3 charger. Let's be honest, a Level 1 charger won't do anything for you when you have an EV (not a Hybrid)
- At some public place (e.g. Mall, shopping center, Starbucks etc.)
- At work. Assuming your workplace has charging stations
At least with a Tesla, you have those options AND superchargers. I feel EV manufacturers should be forced to contribute to charging capabilities if they're gonna be churning out vehicles.
Will anybody want to buy a used EV if they have to replace the battery? Just wondering what that will be like. And what about the software? If the new owner robs a bank while using your old car do you get a call from the over zealous SWAT team in the dead of night?
When I was in the US, I saw all these pick ups and thought "These people must all be under way to pick something up and do that on sucha regular basis that requires such a vehicle." And why under way to pick something up? Because most where empty.
When I owned a car and needed to pick something up that was larger than my vehicle could cary, I justed rented a car. Happend twice in 7 years.
Because, be real, the majority of the pickups is for show, now for actually picking up things.
And even then I suppose a van would be much better, as the loading is done much lower, so not as much lifting and all the goods are dry all the time.
Ask the UK people if these cars are able to drive fast when they are white.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Beware naive extrapolation. Electric cars are definitely not going to "take over" in just 10 years. It's going to take longer than that for the supply chain to develop to supply the batteries and power trains and to reconfigure the assembly lines
You are forgetting there is a whole other path - hydrogen cars. Between battery electric and hydrogen electric (which is ramping up now as well) the trend can for sure hold.
I'm not even sure the trend would be impossible to hold if you just considered Tesla alone...
I could see electric cars conquering major market share within 2-3 decades
Ten years for sure, because electric cars are just too compelling for most people once direct purchase costs start to dip below ICE vehicles. So popular that a substantial market for ICE to electric conversions will probably arise.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Arguably few consumers need to be able to travel more than 300 miles in a given day, and with an EV you have the option of starting every day off with a full charge from your home charger. EV range, depending on configuration, can reach over this 300 mile mark now and will likely only continue to improve.
The larger difficulty is that quick charge stations are not available in all areas, so if you're making a longer trip you need to plan ahead on where you're going to stop to recharge along the way and for the time delay necessary to recharge (~30 minutes at a quick charge station).
The price of quick charging at a Tesla Super Charger still works out to be about half what you'd pay for a full tank of gas (though that may vary by region).
Over 2% of American vehicles being sold are EVs (not hybrids, but EVs). Tesla can not make it them fast enough to meet the demand here, let alone in other nations. Just the other day, I let a friend drive our Tesla MS. Now, they own a Tesla M3 (in no small part because their toyota was breaking down with only 120K miles on it and they did not want to fork out some 10K for upkeep over the next 5 years).
I have argued that by 2022/23, that the majority of new cars sold will be EVs. The reason is that more and more ppl are driving Tesla (cheaper in EVERY WAY than any competitor, except possibly with insurance) and at the same time, Tesla is forcing other car makers to start building DECENT EVs, or lose all their sales to Tesla (and down the road, possibly china, when they finally start building decent cars, as opposed to more POS).
As to trucks and vans, they are here or shortly here. Rivian will have their truck out next year. Multiple companies are selling EV vans, though to be honest, they are WAYYYY to expensive. In fact, if you are simply shuffling tools from 1 site to another, you are much better off in ICE, than in an EV. OTOH, if you are moving cargo all day long, like FedEX or a distribution warehouse, then EV is superior.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
That's why your 'use case' may require an ICE vehicle that can go 700+ miles like a Honda Accord (or hybrid). But 99% of people are driving less than 150 miles total per day so electric would not be an issue. However apartment dwellers may not have the option of a charging station at home so gas isn't going away for a while
Californians are going to be in for a rude wakeup call when the miners get to the end of the electricty veins.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
You always have the option of renting a gasoline car for long trips
Renting a car can prove cost prohibitive for liability reasons before you turn 25 or if you're crossing state or provincial lines.
The more Diesel fuel for me!
,,,that are powered by the coal burning down the street at the pwoer plant. How woke, CA residents!
And if I had 100 people over for breakfast tomorrow there wouldn't be enough milk.
Arguably few consumers need to be able to travel more than 300 miles in a given day
I've encountered a couple of these use cases in my life:
Trips to a theme park A 180-mile (290 km) drive to an amusement park without a charger (or with a usurious parking surcharge to use the charger) and a 180-mile drive back already exceed 300 miles (480 km). Trips to and from college A college student lives on campus during his third and fourth years of a bachelor's degree, after having completed the first two at a community college. Parents are picking the student up at the start of vacation week and dropping him or her off before classes begin again, with some fraction of the student's possessions (wardrobe, computer, game console, TV, etc.) being moved for the duration. This move doesn't last nearly long enough for a charge.Or is there a practical solar charger for such trips?
The Rivian looks like shit.
I go out to California once or twice a year. Every time I'm there the news is issuing alerts about electricity usage, turning your thermostat up to ease the load on the grid. So should you unplug your EV, too?
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
You forgot another problem with mass EV adoption: The large percentage of the population that lives in apartments, and thus has no practical way to charge an EV.
Because of NIMBYism California does not have nuclear power plants anymore. Expect a lot of natural gas power plants in your future.
Says who? You? All hale high priest drinky. Who do you think you are? The guy who made it thought his genes deserved it and so on and so forth. Send my best to Lenin and Stalin when you meet them in hell, komrade.
Those with the most to lose should pay the most for the maintenance of the system that protects what they have.
Bring on the private armies baby ! That would probably be cheaper than taxes. No ? You wouldn't like that ? Pay more, get more rights, no ?
It's not a big deal. A lot of her neighbors in Cali also use plug-in EVs, and they all have no problem using them.
The fossil fuel firms depend on you incorrectly thinking gasoline vehicles are cheaper, whereas in the real world they typically cost 1/2 to 1/20th the cost to fuel and half the maintenance fees for a full EV.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Just the other day, I let a friend drive our Tesla MS. Now, they own a Tesla M3
Tesla can not make it them fast enough to meet the demand here, let alone in other nations.
But your "friend" received a Tesla M3 within a few days huh?
I can't get a Kia that fast, let alone a 90's era Kia like the Tesla Model 3.
Hey WindBourne, why do you only have a grand total of THREE post over at teslamotorsclub.com, when you're already at ten posts in this thread alone?
I think you are faking ownership of "our Tesla MS" my friend.
Lol, not me. I am not a fan of California, nor do I live there. I find them to be hypocrites. They are funding a bullet train to nowhere, but they have one of the largest homeless populations in the nation. I think the priority for money would be the homeless. This topic right here is where I find them to be hypocrites. They can claim they are 100 renewable as long as they do not count the energy they import from other states.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
The larger difficulty is that quick charge stations are not available in all areas...
Yet.
In 1930 there wasn't a gas station on every corner yet either. As EVs become more and more popular, the gas station model of "they need fuel, so lets sell them shit while they're here" will be applied even more aggressively to EV drivers. Why? Because most likely EV drivers are going to spend more time refueling than petrol drivers. That means more chance to shake them down for some cash.
So put EV chargers in a restaurant, and make them free for diners. Build a mini golf course and ice cream stand at the exit, and include some charge stations. There's an entire industry waiting to be built around charge stations, just like the doughnut/coffee shop and convenience store industry built up around gas stations.
The one thing I'll never underestimate is how quickly an industry can pivot when a new income stream pops up, and an old one starts fading. If there are two bed and breakfast places in a small town, and one has an EV charger, about 100% of the EV business is going to stay at that one. Once EVs get to be even 10% of the vehicle makeup, we're going to see a giant uptick in support for EVs. Everyone who doesn't see this looming large is going to get hurt badly if they're not catering to EVs while their competitors are.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Just a couple of reality checks for you..
1. The existing grid cannot support a full conversion to electric cars, in fact estimates are that it will start to fail at less than 25%.
2. Home solar for charging? Pull the other one. Unless you drive your electric vehicle very short distances occasionally there is no easy you will have that kind of capacity (and that's ignoring the fact that most EVs are charging at night, when solar is... Less that efficient shall we say?)
Yes there are plenty of people who hate on EVs for silly reasons, but I suggest sticking to reality yourself..
No practical way to recharge them today, in every neighborhood. However new apartments and condos which provide parking are already installing EV charge points to pull in new tenants. Look in any major city, and you'll find a lot of landlords competing for tenants by offering perks, and EV charging is one of the newer ones.
It won't be overnight, but EV charging is rapidly becoming more readily available. If you have to street park 100% of the time at home and at work, maybe an EV won't work for you. But a lot of parking garages are adding chargers, as are a lot of businesses. Even if you street park in front of your apartment, if your work or work parking deck has an EV charger, you still might be able to swing an EV.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Well I don't want to stop at any of those places for more than 20 minutes. That might be practical once everyone has chargers that can do a fill in less than 15 mins.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
there are certain things that no matter what happens, an EV is not the appropriate replacement. The militant Climate Change folks will not accept that though.
Think about it .. availability of Fast chargers which will be a necessity .. the logistics of this present problems. A single fast charging system.. can only charge at the max 36 cars or so a day. that is it. That is assuming a vehicle is in that spot 24 hours a day - and NO one leaves their vehicle in that spot over their allotted time. No one is going to do that 100% of the time.
Anything to do with life safety.. (emergency vehicles)... utility trucks.. not really viable for this.
Construction equipment - if you are preparing a site - there isn't going to be charging facilities - what are they going to do have 20x time the needed equipment - just to rotate out the ones needing charging? ....that is going to kill construction costs.
Storm response - if a severe storm knocks out power to an area for some extended period of time - that basically shuts down an entire geographical area until electricity is brought back on line and everyone can charge their vehicles adequately.
Commercial product/services -- perishable foods.. range/time to load/off load within battery limits?
Current technology does not account for these and i'm sure many others.
Am i against it - no - if it works for you - that's great. There are situations where it isn't and that needs to be recognized.
If I spend that much money on a vehicle, I don't want to be one of those 99% that suddenly realize that they DO need to go more than 150 miles total. Possibly in an urgent way.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
...nor do I live there
I can tell.
They are funding a bullet train to nowhere
Actually, it's going to connect the Bay Area and Southern California metro areas with each other and the Central Valley, but go on with the regurgitated talking points.
They can claim they are 100 renewable as long as they do not count the energy they import from other states.
The mandate does take into account energy coming from other states.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
Actually, it's going to connect the Bay Area and Southern California metro areas with each other and the Central Valley, but go on with the regurgitated talking points.
Glad to see your priorities do not include your huge homeless problem. And my information about the various topics from california comes from LA times, so don't think I look for anti California sites. Your state sucks. I can also add reference from USA Today where the quality of living is ranked very low. But hey, you love your state.
Personally, I wish your state would grow a set of balls and leave the union. You hate the rest of us, and we also hate you. Get out, and don't let the door hit you in the ass.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
alifornia ranks last in quality of life in new reportM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/03/01/california-ranks-last-quality-life-new-report/384853002/
I figured because you wouldn't believe me nor the source I spoke of that the quality of living was ranked so low. Here is your reference, or what. Do you think that USA Today is a far right web site?
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
Well, you are seemingly a cantankerous old fucker who doesn't want anything. The rest of us want to do shit, so it doesn't really matter that you hate the world and progress. Keep shouting at clouds on the internet.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
The problem in America is, people still don't see EVs as cost-effective, practical alternatives to internal combustion engine vehicles in most cases!
Most people can't read a bus schedule, either. The operating cost per-mile of an EV is a fraction of the cost of just the gasoline for a traditional car, even when you add in the cost of replacing batteries.
Some of it has to do with charging infrastructure and in the rare times you need long distance, the charge times. I'm sure things will get significantly better the more EVs we get on the road. Where I live I don't really have an easy power source for the car, but it might be worth it to have one installed. All considerations.
I would love to own a tesla, but it's quite a bit more then my Civic. My next car I definitely want to at least be a hybrid but I'm going to have my civic at least couple more years. Maybe in a couple of years I'll want to weight an all electric for myself and keep the wife on gasoline or vise versa. She's a great candidate for no maintenance cars.
Heck, I may just push her toward EV and keep my civic for long drives where we don't plan to spend the night (we are driving to Colorado from San Diego with no stops next spring, for example) during the trip there and back.
Renting any vehicle in America is expensive. To get a van or truck to haul something one afternoon, would be $100. Don't be fooled by the Uhaul ads. You WILL NOT get a van for $19.99 for the whole weekend as advertised. You will get one for $19.99 + $69.99 processing fee + $0.15/mile + the remaining amount of fuel in the tank at a 30% markup + optional insurance + taxes.
Are you this wrong about everything?
No one would trust an Indian 2nd hand car...
http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/total-world-plug-in-vehicle-volumes/
Still very far behind cleaner countries.
https://cleantechnica.com/2018...
Why call an EV "price inflated"? its just more expensive because its new tech that not yet mass produced in the numbers ICE are.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
what would you do if your ICE was up on blocks with the gearbox out and it would take a few hours to get it back and working and you had an urgent need to use the car? There are all sorts of hypothetical situations as virtually no solution is 100% perfect.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
I don't see him saying his friend bought a brand new M3 - it may well have been a used car
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
"If you have to street park 100% of the time at home and at work, maybe an EV won't work for you." thats the case for now but if they have a ICE car they must park it somewhere overnight. Those "somewheres" will start to get chargers just like they get parking meters, in fact they could double up the functions. Street lights can also be converted to double up as a charger too. Some apartment blocks also have parking.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
And at least 10% of them are still on the road today.
{O,o}
"Think about it .. availability of Fast chargers which will be a necessity ......." - there is more than one charger at lots of sites and the vast majority of EV drivers will not need a fast charger more than a few times a year. ... ."- look up "electric construction equipment" in google, being prepared. they all charged up before they go - common sense - who uses the equipment during the night (apart from a few special cases)? ..." - check for "refrigerated electric vans" in google
"Anything to do with life safety.. (emergency vehicles)... utility trucks.. not really viable for this." - why not? they don't have to travel far.
"Construction equipment
"Storm response - if a severe storm knocks out power to an area for some extended period of time -" mobile solar plus batteries
"Commercial product/services
Search Engines can be very helpful
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Since I've had a family, I've bought new vehicles instead of old, precisely because that becomes a huge problem with older vehicles.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I call it price inflated because they are simpler than an ICE and come with more inconveniences so they never should have been priced higher. They have been rushed to market.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Using the charger on route will more than likely be determined by your bladder
This article claims that a 22 kW charger in a public place may provide 80 miles of range per hour of charging. A 5 minute restroom break would thus provide only 6.7 miles.
Why not read what you reply to?
Not surprising