I agree with your assessment of the use cases that EV doesn't really work for today.
However, where condos / apartments have parking, my sense is this is a laggy infrastructure issue, which is likely to be solved in new-builds and retrofits over time. If a parking lot is mainly filled with EVs, it will be cleaner and less fumey than other parking lots, and the building owners can also make money out of providing the charging infrastructure if they wished.
Perhaps it was a problem, but just much less of a problem than the benefit of having a fully charged car each morning. Trade-offs, the heart and soul of engineering and consumer decision-making.
So your working assumptions is that most people who buy this car wouldn't have a drive or garage on which to install a charger, is it? And what facts back that up, exactly? This is a car aimed at fairly wealthy family types living in suburbia. They will have drives. They will park their cars on their drives overnight and in the morning -- as if by magic! -- they'll have a fully charged car again.
Anyone who has owned an EV car, as I have, can assure you that you're talking absolute horse-cock. Stop-and-go driving is slow and painful, but increases the range dramatically compared to driving at say 55mph continuously.
Anyone who thinks McKinsey is a person, and missed the fact that it is the world's top management consultancy, really isn't in a position to talk about stupidity.
The article is *entirely* about the impact on utilities of lower revenues from power. It's all about how they can respond. His response, and yours, is the starting point for the article.
Eh? The left is pleased that cities and states are doing this, but they'd be more pleased if cities, states and the federal government were doing this.
Come on, you never photoshopped yourself standing on the moon? Or anything else? The rest of us have which is why we think complaining about it makes you look like a stick-in-the-mud arse.
1. I have never photoshopped myself standing on the moon, or anything similar, and neither has anyone I know. 2. I have also never faked a Time magazine with myself on the cover and put it on the wall at work, and neither has anyone I know 3. These two things are not the same. Work is different from home, for a start 4. But, if anyone I knew had done either #1 or #2, they would be the subject of unending ridicule and in the case of #2, they'd be likely to be fired 5. If you genuinely have done this. If you really honestly have faked a picture of yourself to big yourself up, and not for shits'n'giggles, then holy shit you live in a different world from me.
The fact of an existing trend is completely orthogonal to the efficacy or otherwise of a city's actions in affecting climate change. If a city buys EV buses and promotes public transport more generally, its CO2e from transport will be lower than it would otherwise have been. That kind of action is exactly what these cities are committing to.
May's ability to argue these points is just a *teensy* bit compromised by the fact her new shiny government is now propped up by the political wing of the UDA. And I don't think May will be allowed to call a GE ever again. The Tories are furious at her
I always thought "no deal is better than a bad deal" is a helpfully ambiguous phrase that could be re-interpreted in the future to mean "leaving things as they are [ie, no deal] is better than a bad deal [to exit]"
They absolutely did have a choice over the fees. It was clear that demanding the LibDems ditch their fees pledge was a successful move by the Tories to break LibDem will. The LibDems ought to have been able to recognise that a huge chunk of their support at that time came from students.
Of course there's a lower bound. A device the size of a microbe is not going to blow a hole in a fuselage, is it? So there's obviously a lower bound. Whether a phone crosses that bound is a different question.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with your assessment of the use cases that EV doesn't really work for today.
However, where condos / apartments have parking, my sense is this is a laggy infrastructure issue, which is likely to be solved in new-builds and retrofits over time. If a parking lot is mainly filled with EVs, it will be cleaner and less fumey than other parking lots, and the building owners can also make money out of providing the charging infrastructure if they wished.
Perhaps it was a problem, but just much less of a problem than the benefit of having a fully charged car each morning. Trade-offs, the heart and soul of engineering and consumer decision-making.
So your working assumptions is that most people who buy this car wouldn't have a drive or garage on which to install a charger, is it? And what facts back that up, exactly? This is a car aimed at fairly wealthy family types living in suburbia. They will have drives. They will park their cars on their drives overnight and in the morning -- as if by magic! -- they'll have a fully charged car again.
Anyone who has owned an EV car, as I have, can assure you that you're talking absolute horse-cock. Stop-and-go driving is slow and painful, but increases the range dramatically compared to driving at say 55mph continuously.
And no, no-one (besides you) ever accuses McKinsey of being stupid.
Um.
Anyone who thinks McKinsey is a person, and missed the fact that it is the world's top management consultancy, really isn't in a position to talk about stupidity.
The article is *entirely* about the impact on utilities of lower revenues from power. It's all about how they can respond. His response, and yours, is the starting point for the article.
McKinsey has been accused of being many things over the years, but this is probably the first time they've been called "retarded progressives".
It would really help if you read the article.
The new reality: where it's impossible to tell if what you've written was serious or satire.
Eh? The left is pleased that cities and states are doing this, but they'd be more pleased if cities, states and the federal government were doing this.
Come on, you never photoshopped yourself standing on the moon? Or anything else? The rest of us have which is why we think complaining about it makes you look like a stick-in-the-mud arse.
1. I have never photoshopped myself standing on the moon, or anything similar, and neither has anyone I know.
2. I have also never faked a Time magazine with myself on the cover and put it on the wall at work, and neither has anyone I know
3. These two things are not the same. Work is different from home, for a start
4. But, if anyone I knew had done either #1 or #2, they would be the subject of unending ridicule and in the case of #2, they'd be likely to be fired
5. If you genuinely have done this. If you really honestly have faked a picture of yourself to big yourself up, and not for shits'n'giggles, then holy shit you live in a different world from me.
The fact of an existing trend is completely orthogonal to the efficacy or otherwise of a city's actions in affecting climate change. If a city buys EV buses and promotes public transport more generally, its CO2e from transport will be lower than it would otherwise have been. That kind of action is exactly what these cities are committing to.
I'm gonna take a wild guess that you don't work in pricing, do you?
May's ability to argue these points is just a *teensy* bit compromised by the fact her new shiny government is now propped up by the political wing of the UDA. And I don't think May will be allowed to call a GE ever again. The Tories are furious at her
Much as they might like Corbyn, they're not going to promise loyalty to the Queen, which is a requirement for taking office...
I always thought "no deal is better than a bad deal" is a helpfully ambiguous phrase that could be re-interpreted in the future to mean "leaving things as they are [ie, no deal] is better than a bad deal [to exit]"
"Clean Brexit" in the sense that a guillotine will cleanly separate a head from a body, right?
And the idea that the DUP, of all parties, will prevent a Conservative-led government from pursuing puritan policies!!
They absolutely did have a choice over the fees. It was clear that demanding the LibDems ditch their fees pledge was a successful move by the Tories to break LibDem will. The LibDems ought to have been able to recognise that a huge chunk of their support at that time came from students.
They do. The Renault Zoe looks more or less the same as a Renault Clio.
But it's a super-mini, a category that doesn't really exist in the US. And Renault doesn't sell in the US anyway.
Does a Tesla really not have an app that lets you set a charging schedule or start charging remotely??
Or if you prefer high-end supercar, a Rimac
Take a look at a Renault Zoe.
That is spot-on. Like Trump and Paris, it's all about signalling to the base that he's gonna fuck over people they don't like.
Of course there's a lower bound. A device the size of a microbe is not going to blow a hole in a fuselage, is it? So there's obviously a lower bound. Whether a phone crosses that bound is a different question.