At one point, the article says, in effect, that it's unhealthy to obsess over getting straight As -- and that it's ineffective, because people like Martin Luther King and JK Rowling didn't get straight As. If it's unhealthy to give yourself a hard time pursuing straight As, it's even more unhealthy to give yourself a hard time trying to be Martin Luther King or JK Rowling -- and it's wildly less attainable.
Nope. And why is that relevant or what has it to do with your anecdotes versus data insanity?
Because, as I said before, that quote is a dictum about science. You don't seem to understand how debate works. The idea is for you to rebut what I say, not merely repeat the same questions. For example, you could say "it's not a dictum about science and here is my reasoning". C'mon, treat yourself and me with a bit more respect.
In which school do you have 7 years of science? Most certainly in none in your country...
Given you weren't bright enough to be able to read the plain meaning of my sentence ("a science class for 7 year olds"), your snark about education in the UK just adds to the general air of stupidity.
The UK works on a very different setup from the US, clearly. People routinely have charging cables in their car here. I do, and so does every EV driver I know. They're 20ft long or more and look like this: https://www.evcableshop.co.uk/... They come in a neat little bag. They don't take up much room and aren't inconvenient.
Buried wireless is obviously a better long term solution, but it requires new on-street infrastructure whereas lamp posts are already there, digging is super-expensive, induction won't charge as fast for a long while yet, any problems with the charger will be expensive to deal with because it will require more digging, and the cars themselves have to be totally redesigned. I'm more interested in near-term solutions.
I don't understand what you mean when you say: "you're going to encounter the cable frozen to the ground when you try to drag it to your car". EV drivers have cables that they carry with them. While a cable is being used to charge a car, it's going to create sufficient heat that it won't freeze to the ground.
Charging cables are carefully designed to be usable in the snow and rain without corroding the car charging port.
Honestly, these concerns you have are outside-in theoretical issues that haven't been an actual problem in practice.
Wow, you really really don't seem to get it. I take a drug and I feel better. Lots of people take a drug and they all feel better. Does that mean we know whether the drug works? No, because we actually need to test the drug under controlled conditions, and that means that not all data are considered high enough quality to include.
This is really basic. Like 7 year old science class basics, about the need to control for confounding variables, the need for accurate calibration of measuring instruments, etc etc.
I think a ton of solutions will get tried. Buried wireless is a nice idea, but the costs are pretty high for deployment, and we're several generations away from having cars that can use it.
Not sure what problems you think lamppost charging would have in bad weather? It's just a charging cable, which works fine in the winter in Norway when the weather is pretty shit. Similarly, the inconsistent placement of charging ports on cars is an issue today with charging posts whether they're in a lamppost or not, but BEV drivers manage fine.
You guys are so inconsistent. If you support fossil fuel generation, you should support fossil fuel power plants, which are typically located in the countryside. If you don't support fossil fuel generation, then you should be encouraging renewables and BEVs and raging against Trump.
Are you fucking kidding me? "The plural of anecdotes is not data" is a dictum about *science*. It says that the gap between what an individual experiences and whether, for instance, a drug can be said to be effective, is significant. It requires the scientific method to fill.
Here's how one charge point provider in the UK thinks about this: people will charge where they were going anyway. That largely means one of four types of charging: at home, at work, en-route and destination charging. Many destinations will want to use chargers as a way to attract EV drivers. You know how people say "EVs are only for rich people"? Well, that makes EV drivers a pretty attractive segment if you're a supermarket, an easy way for you to drive up average basket spend in your stores. Indeed, Tesco in the UK are doing exactly that, offering 4 free 7kW chargers in each of 600 stores (plus a load of 50kW chargers too). Obviously, the marginal additional load of 28kW of potential charging is pretty trivial vs the existing load that a Tesco store will use (refrigeration, HVAC, lighting, bakery etc).
At urban speeds, and particularly in relation to acceleration and other situations when an engine is having to work hard, eg driving up a hill, the difference between an EV and an ICE car is absolutely vast. Also true when stationary (unless your ICE has stop-start).
As I said earlier, the plural of anecdote is not data, and it really isn't convincing to try to argue that the moving parts in ICE cars aren't a source of a material fraction of reliability issues that those cars suffer. Every study I've seen builds lower maintenance costs into its modelling for the impact of EV. For example:
Brakes get a lot less wear on an EV. Most of the time, they're not used because all the braking is done by regen. I would expect tyre wear to be higher for comparable cars (eg Zoe vs Clio) because EVs are heavier than equivalents.
I know. That's why I think the ability to turn the noise on and off might be removed. It would make me sad. But that's the tragedy of the commons innit?
A service for an EV is about £90. Don't know what it costs for an ICE.
I understand your point about reliability. But the list was a mix of scheduled maintenance and breakdown issues, and you've skipped over engine tune-up. As ICE cars age, it's the moving parts that wear out. An ICE car with 300k miles on the clock is going to have had many moving parts related to the engine attended to; not so with an EV.
Let's tackle a few of these: 1. Temperature shifts. Battery packs in EVs come with battery management systems. The evidence to date is that they provide excellent protection of battery state of health. EVs are pretty common in Norway, which gets pretty damn cold, for example. 2. Environmental costs of lithium extraction. There are worse chemicals in most EVs. Lithium extraction is about as benign as you can get for a metal. It's certainly nowhere near as damaging as extracting oil. 3. Power generation. Most EVs will be charged at night, and this is when other power demands are low. So the net additional capacity required is low as a result. Additionally, the average American car is driven 30 miles per day. At 3 miles per kWh, that's 10kWh of power. So that would be just over 3 hours of a 3kW outlet. Not exactly a massive strain between say 2 and 5am. 4. Disposal of used EVs (due to batteries wearing out in 6 to 7 years). Battery packs last a lot longer than that. Once they do wear out -- likely 10 to 20 years in the future, they can be second-lifed as home power management systems (where SoH matters less). Once they're no good for that either, the lithium can be recycled. That makes them much easier to manage than engine blocks. 5. Cheap EVs. Second hand EVs are routinely available for under the $10k you mentioned. Not there with new EVs yet, but it'll happen.
In the UK, commercial properties routinely have three phase power capable of supplying 22kW. That's good enough for most EVs to get a decent amount of charge in 30mins. So no new cabling required.
You've explained elsewhere how EVs won't fit into your life. But the reason you give here doesn't fly: doesn't it take you at least 30mins to get round Costco? That's enough time for an 80% charge. And anyway, I'm sure you have off-street parking at home. The post you were responding to was addressing the question of urbanites with no off-street parking, and I'm sure that's not you.
Slashdot Mirror
Spot on.
At one point, the article says, in effect, that it's unhealthy to obsess over getting straight As -- and that it's ineffective, because people like Martin Luther King and JK Rowling didn't get straight As. If it's unhealthy to give yourself a hard time pursuing straight As, it's even more unhealthy to give yourself a hard time trying to be Martin Luther King or JK Rowling -- and it's wildly less attainable.
Nope. And why is that relevant or what has it to do with your anecdotes versus data insanity?
Because, as I said before, that quote is a dictum about science. You don't seem to understand how debate works. The idea is for you to rebut what I say, not merely repeat the same questions. For example, you could say "it's not a dictum about science and here is my reasoning". C'mon, treat yourself and me with a bit more respect.
In which school do you have 7 years of science? Most certainly in none in your country ...
Given you weren't bright enough to be able to read the plain meaning of my sentence ("a science class for 7 year olds"), your snark about education in the UK just adds to the general air of stupidity.
The UK works on a very different setup from the US, clearly. People routinely have charging cables in their car here. I do, and so does every EV driver I know. They're 20ft long or more and look like this:
https://www.evcableshop.co.uk/...
They come in a neat little bag. They don't take up much room and aren't inconvenient.
Buried wireless is obviously a better long term solution, but it requires new on-street infrastructure whereas lamp posts are already there, digging is super-expensive, induction won't charge as fast for a long while yet, any problems with the charger will be expensive to deal with because it will require more digging, and the cars themselves have to be totally redesigned. I'm more interested in near-term solutions.
I don't understand what you mean when you say: "you're going to encounter the cable frozen to the ground when you try to drag it to your car". EV drivers have cables that they carry with them. While a cable is being used to charge a car, it's going to create sufficient heat that it won't freeze to the ground.
Charging cables are carefully designed to be usable in the snow and rain without corroding the car charging port.
Honestly, these concerns you have are outside-in theoretical issues that haven't been an actual problem in practice.
Wow, you really really don't seem to get it. I take a drug and I feel better. Lots of people take a drug and they all feel better. Does that mean we know whether the drug works? No, because we actually need to test the drug under controlled conditions, and that means that not all data are considered high enough quality to include.
This is really basic. Like 7 year old science class basics, about the need to control for confounding variables, the need for accurate calibration of measuring instruments, etc etc.
I think a ton of solutions will get tried. Buried wireless is a nice idea, but the costs are pretty high for deployment, and we're several generations away from having cars that can use it.
Not sure what problems you think lamppost charging would have in bad weather? It's just a charging cable, which works fine in the winter in Norway when the weather is pretty shit. Similarly, the inconsistent placement of charging ports on cars is an issue today with charging posts whether they're in a lamppost or not, but BEV drivers manage fine.
You guys are so inconsistent. If you support fossil fuel generation, you should support fossil fuel power plants, which are typically located in the countryside. If you don't support fossil fuel generation, then you should be encouraging renewables and BEVs and raging against Trump.
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across. Thanks for expressing it clearly.
Are you fucking kidding me? "The plural of anecdotes is not data" is a dictum about *science*. It says that the gap between what an individual experiences and whether, for instance, a drug can be said to be effective, is significant. It requires the scientific method to fill.
Well, I did provide a link to a study just before in a post. There are dozens more. Here's another one
https://www.sciencedirect.com/...
In any event, spark plugs can't fail in an EV (obviously) and running out of charge, like running out of fuel, is not a reliability issue.
Really, data is not just multiple anecdotes. You have to be pretty spectacularly ignorant of science to think that.
Here's how one charge point provider in the UK thinks about this: people will charge where they were going anyway. That largely means one of four types of charging: at home, at work, en-route and destination charging. Many destinations will want to use chargers as a way to attract EV drivers. You know how people say "EVs are only for rich people"? Well, that makes EV drivers a pretty attractive segment if you're a supermarket, an easy way for you to drive up average basket spend in your stores. Indeed, Tesco in the UK are doing exactly that, offering 4 free 7kW chargers in each of 600 stores (plus a load of 50kW chargers too). Obviously, the marginal additional load of 28kW of potential charging is pretty trivial vs the existing load that a Tesco store will use (refrigeration, HVAC, lighting, bakery etc).
And EVs can do something funky about "is it cold outside" that ICE cars can't: pre-heat.
At urban speeds, and particularly in relation to acceleration and other situations when an engine is having to work hard, eg driving up a hill, the difference between an EV and an ICE car is absolutely vast. Also true when stationary (unless your ICE has stop-start).
Did you miss the part about "at scale"? We can't plant enough trees to create the fuel to power all our vehicles, not even close.
As I said earlier, the plural of anecdote is not data, and it really isn't convincing to try to argue that the moving parts in ICE cars aren't a source of a material fraction of reliability issues that those cars suffer. Every study I've seen builds lower maintenance costs into its modelling for the impact of EV. For example:
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/med...
Brakes get a lot less wear on an EV. Most of the time, they're not used because all the braking is done by regen. I would expect tyre wear to be higher for comparable cars (eg Zoe vs Clio) because EVs are heavier than equivalents.
I know. That's why I think the ability to turn the noise on and off might be removed. It would make me sad. But that's the tragedy of the commons innit?
A service for an EV is about £90. Don't know what it costs for an ICE.
I understand your point about reliability. But the list was a mix of scheduled maintenance and breakdown issues, and you've skipped over engine tune-up. As ICE cars age, it's the moving parts that wear out. An ICE car with 300k miles on the clock is going to have had many moving parts related to the engine attended to; not so with an EV.
Sure, but that's not what the OP was talking about. They explicitly said they were talking about people who have nowhere to charge at home.
Let's tackle a few of these:
1. Temperature shifts. Battery packs in EVs come with battery management systems. The evidence to date is that they provide excellent protection of battery state of health. EVs are pretty common in Norway, which gets pretty damn cold, for example.
2. Environmental costs of lithium extraction. There are worse chemicals in most EVs. Lithium extraction is about as benign as you can get for a metal. It's certainly nowhere near as damaging as extracting oil.
3. Power generation. Most EVs will be charged at night, and this is when other power demands are low. So the net additional capacity required is low as a result. Additionally, the average American car is driven 30 miles per day. At 3 miles per kWh, that's 10kWh of power. So that would be just over 3 hours of a 3kW outlet. Not exactly a massive strain between say 2 and 5am.
4. Disposal of used EVs (due to batteries wearing out in 6 to 7 years). Battery packs last a lot longer than that. Once they do wear out -- likely 10 to 20 years in the future, they can be second-lifed as home power management systems (where SoH matters less). Once they're no good for that either, the lithium can be recycled. That makes them much easier to manage than engine blocks.
5. Cheap EVs. Second hand EVs are routinely available for under the $10k you mentioned. Not there with new EVs yet, but it'll happen.
In the UK, commercial properties routinely have three phase power capable of supplying 22kW. That's good enough for most EVs to get a decent amount of charge in 30mins. So no new cabling required.
You've explained elsewhere how EVs won't fit into your life. But the reason you give here doesn't fly: doesn't it take you at least 30mins to get round Costco? That's enough time for an 80% charge. And anyway, I'm sure you have off-street parking at home. The post you were responding to was addressing the question of urbanites with no off-street parking, and I'm sure that's not you.
The Zero is pretty exciting.
https://www.zeromotorcycles.co...
That was sarcasm, I should have said