[pikkagtr]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Do you mean like the 4th of July’s we get at refineries now and then? There was in Richmond not too long ago. And before that one in the Houston metro area. I don’t keep count. Just from memory.

you can put a gasoline fire out with......water

Lithium battery fires..........

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

you can put a gasoline fire out with......water

Lithium battery fires..........

Not a refinery fire. Neither can you turn off a valve. It burns until all fuel is spent.

These misconceptions are puzzling.

[Pheonix]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

There are presently approx. 950,000 chargers in California. The bulk of that, say 900,000, installed in the last 10 years. That’s 1,730 per week. Say I’m off. It’s actually evenly over 20 years. That’s still over 900 chargers per week.

I’m not understanding the hesitancy to look at the numbers.

And if there’s a law that every new home must have solar, storage and charger, that’s that.

There isn't any hesitancy to look at the numbers!
I am just asking you to provide the sources for your numbers since I could not find any conclusive information!
According to this website, CA barely has 14,000 charging stations with about 36,000 charge ports

https://www.govtech.com/biz/data/whi...ectric-vehicle

And this website, which stated CA has about 73,000 public and shared chargers:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/insidee...-chargers/amp/

Sure, the articles are a bit dated but not anywhere near the numbers you stated.

Also, I am not sure what the definition of public vs. Shared charging stations? I am thinking public is open to everyone bs shared is only limited to certain groups (like companies sponsored)
Also, right now it is not apple to apple in comparing Gas stations to Charging Stations.

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by Pheonix

There isn't any hesitancy to look at the numbers!
I am just asking you to provide the sources for your numbers since I could not find any conclusive information!
According to this website, CA barely has 14,000 charging stations with about 36,000 charge ports

https://www.govtech.com/biz/data/whi...ectric-vehicle

And this website, which stated CA has about 73,000 public and shared chargers:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/insidee...-chargers/amp/

Sure, the articles are a bit dated but not anywhere near the numbers you stated.

Also, I am not sure what the definition of public vs. Shared charging stations? I am thinking public is open to everyone bs shared is only limited to certain groups (like companies sponsored)
Also, right now it is not apple to apple in comparing Gas stations to Charging Stations.

I stand corrected. Let’s use your findings. 36,000 ports it’s 69 per week in the last 10 years, or 46 per week over the last 15 years. WAG, we’ll be at 100 per week soon.

[G MONEY]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

I stand corrected. Let’s use your findings. 36,000 ports it’s 69 per week in the last 10 years, or 46 per week over the last 15 years. WAG, we’ll be at 100 per week soon.

How are these charging stations powered?

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by G MONEY

How are these charging stations powered?

Excess power. There’s loads of it.

[G MONEY]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Excess power. There’s loads of it.

I get that. From where is my question?

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by G MONEY

I get that. From where is my question?

In California? CAISO/WECC.

[Pheonix]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

I stand corrected. Let’s use your findings. 36,000 ports it’s 69 per week in the last 10 years, or 46 per week over the last 15 years. WAG, we’ll be at 100 per week soon.

I wish that is the case! Except it is not simple just to add charging station; read my personal experiences with the installations for both home use and workplace!

[Pheonix]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Excess power. There’s loads of it.

Sure, there's load of electrical energy available in California! So much that they asked consumers to cut back on power usages, then rolling blackouts, etc... There are so much excess capacity that even the phony Governor asked PG&E to extend the service of of the the nuclear power plant

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by Pheonix

I wish that is the case! Except it is not simple just to add charging station; read my personal experiences with the installations for both home use and workplace!

Your data point, whilst valid, it’s one data point. Besides, don’t you have ports at home and work?

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by Pheonix

Sure, there's load of electrical energy available in California! So much that they asked consumers to cut back on power usages, then rolling blackouts, etc... There are so much excess capacity that even the phony Governor asked PG&E to extend the service of of the the nuclear power plant

I’m sure you’re not trolling. But at times it feels like you are.

The constraint is to match peak power demand. The vast majority of passenger vehicles are parked during off peak hours, when there’s an excess of power.

That’s all I have to say on this thread.

[pikkagtr]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Not a refinery fire. Neither can you turn off a valve. It burns until all fuel is spent.

These misconceptions are puzzling.

except I would HOPE there are better safety policies at a multi BILLION dollar refinery than at a JUNK YARD
And a damaged and leaking drum of crude or even petrol won't randomly light itself on fire overnight

[x622]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

I’m sure you’re not trolling. But at times it feels like you are.

The constraint is to match peak power demand. The vast majority of passenger vehicles are parked during off peak hours, when there’s an excess of power.

That’s all I have to say on this thread.

When I saw this thread title I knew it was going to be full of people who have no idea how electricity or the grid works, opining their thoughts on why electric cars are good.

I am no expert in the Cali side of the grid since I work with states that have a sane energy policy but lets check some stuff out here;

https://www.caiso.com/todaysoutlook/Pages/index.html

This little page shows you demand, generation, and day forward price estimates. If you note, their demand is right around 40GW with peaks as high as 43GW. Check out their 7 day resource adequacy trend there, it shows how much reserve, net demand etc and the deltas between each of them. A publicly regulated utility is required to keep 112% of total net demand at all times which is why they do so.


Now that that's established lets add some variables;

https://www.thezebra.com/resources/d...iven-per-year/

According to this californians drive 230 billion miles a year.

https://ecocostsavings.com/electric-...per-mile-list/

According to this, most EV's are about .25 to .5kWh/mi

Let's be optimistic and assume most EV's are in the .3 range in the future as an average. This is a total of 69 billion kWh annually. We all know that some days see more miles than others, but that's an average of 189 million kWh a day or approximately 8GW+ of total baseload added as an average at any given point of time in the day. This is approximately 20% of the entirety of California's energy infrastructure. Remember, this is just that load spread across a 24 hour average, if you wanted to restrict that to say a 12 hour window because "stuff just charges at night" you'd then be adding 16GW of baseload there. All the peaker plants, and everything else that comes online during those peak times would have to stay online since there is no nice 17-20GW trough at night.


All of these numbers are very crude, but it should hopefully illustrate that if California wants to do their inane experiment, they need to step up on their baseload. No renewables don't do much for baseload, most utilities list them at about 22-32% of nameplate capacity. All baseload that has been added in the past decade or so has all been natural gas, which as we've seen has exploded in pricing recently and further contributes to energy being expensive. Look no further than day ahead pricing in Germany for electricity to see the outcome of having poor energy policies by their elected officials.

I don't have an issue with electric cars, but I do have an issue with people having no fucking idea how electricity works dictating our energy policy and causing pain in every single sector of industry as well as taking money from the working class by their energy bills. Right now every single business in Germany is getting punished by their poor choices. The working class, mom and pop shops, the industrial manufactories, everyone.

The sooner we stop being so dumb with how we deal with energy, the better off we will be as a species, all this partisan shit has to stop.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by x622

Right now every single business in Germany is getting punished by their poor choices. The working class, mom and pop shops, the industrial manufactories, everyone.

The sooner we stop being so dumb with how we deal with energy, the better off we will be as a species, all this partisan shit has to stop.

You're pushing an agenda here, maybe you don't even know it?

Regardless, the German strategy was looking reasonable until someone decided to try to fulfill their life's dream of reforming the Soviet Union. I don't think this was predictable until a few months before it happened.

[x622]

Originally Posted by chris719

You're pushing an agenda here, maybe you don't even know it?

Regardless, the German strategy was looking reasonable until someone decided to try to fulfill their life's dream of reforming the Soviet Union. I don't think this was predictable until a few months before it happened.

What's my agenda? Having a sane energy policy? Having solar wind and perhaps nuclear too? When you say it like that I am pretty extreme.

Edit:

No Germany was not doing anything sane. They literally pinned most of their entire energy infrastructure on importing. Look at the status of nuclear in Europe and look what the insane Green parties have done there. Yeah. Real sane.

[Quadruple VANOS]

Originally Posted by chris719

…the German strategy was looking reasonable until someone decided to try to fulfill their life's dream of reforming the Soviet Union. I don't think this was predictable until a few months before it happened.

We now know definitively that betting your country's health on Putin being a reliable partner was stupid. I don't think that was difficult to predict.

Smart people will learn and adapt. My optimism is low for CA.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Quadruple VANOS

We now know definitively that betting your country's health on Putin being a reliable partner was stupid. I don't think that was difficult to predict.

Smart people will learn and adapt. My optimism is low for CA.

In hindsight it is very obvious, but was it at the time? If you told people in 2020 that Putin was going to start a war in Ukraine and suffer the economic consequences that ensued, you would have been laughed at by everyone here. One of the largest scale irrational behaviors we have witnessed in our lifetimes.

I certainly was not in support of their decommissioning existing nuclear plants, but it is mostly revisionist history to suggest that people feared Russia would go to this length.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by x622

What's my agenda? Having a sane energy policy? Having solar wind and perhaps nuclear too? When you say it like that I am pretty extreme.

Edit:

No Germany was not doing anything sane. They literally pinned most of their entire energy infrastructure on importing. Look at the status of nuclear in Europe and look what the insane Green parties have done there. Yeah. Real sane.

I mean, it looks a list of Fox talking points, sorry for assuming.

I am pro nuclear, but not current PWR reactor designs. I don't trust humans any longer to operate them safely long term. Natural disasters are increasing both in frequency and severity. The need for huge amounts of water is always going to be trouble since it virtually guarantees construction in disaster-prone areas unless you want to pump water great distances. I realize the advantages and would prefer not to decommission operating reactors, but I'm not enthusiastic about constructing more of the same.

[Quadruple VANOS]

Originally Posted by chris719

In hindsight it is very obvious, but was it at the time?

Yes. Relying on Putin for such a critical need was predictably stupid. People have been saying it for years.

[x622]

Originally Posted by chris719

I mean, it looks a list of Fox talking points, sorry for assuming.

I am pro nuclear, but not current PWR reactor designs. I don't trust humans any longer to operate them safely long term. Natural disasters are increasing both in frequency and severity. The need for huge amounts of water is always going to be trouble since it virtually guarantees construction in disaster-prone areas unless you want to pump water great distances. I realize the advantages and would prefer not to decommission operating reactors, but I'm not enthusiastic about constructing more of the same.

We have had breeder reactors and gen 3s in testing for quite some time. It’s due to the regulatory environment and idiotic public sentiment that we don’t have them in production. I don’t watch fox but if they’re touching on hard points and numbers maybe you should listen. Sounds like you’ve been on that partisan coolaid for a hair too long.

I do not agree with you that the rate of natural disasters increasing either, I think it’s just much more reported and well known now.

[gonzo]

The privileged, white, progressive EU leaders laughed and laughed when that guy called this. They're going to be warm and fat this winter but who'd like to make a prediction on the number of Europeans that freeze to death this winter.

2022...oh so advanced...oh so cutting edge...such forward thinking and policies...WE KNOW THE WAY FORWARD!!!

Freezing to death? Really?
It's coming and they'll just mumble some bs to their favorite reporters and call those that demand accountability fascists, nazis, homophobes or some other crap -out-slobbering-I'm a big brain tongue war against them.

It's like we're going in reverse...intentionally?