4 ms·

Electricity is pretty ubiquitous, not sure why this is a concern?

by danhak 8y ago

paganel 8y ago
It's not ubiquitous in much of Africa, which is an entire continent. Also, in case of natural disasters (think big earthquakes, tornadoes) it becomes instantly un-ubiquitous for large swathes of more advanced economies too, that is at the exact moment when you kind of need the first responders to be able to get to you. On the other hand gasoline is much easier to provide, you just need another gasoline- or diesel-powered bigger tanker. Those things can cross even the Sahara desert [1], that is a place where I don't think we'll get to have a reliable power network in the next few centuries, if at all. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeE3VkoDm14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeE3VkoDm14
- outworlder 8y ago
  How often do you cross the Sahara desert in a hatchback? You don't. You go with specialized, 4 by 4 vehicles. This is a very, very niche application. How many people make this crossing every day? How many people commute to work every day. It's not even in the same ballpark. Why are you trying to optimize for the very rare use-case? You can keep using your trucks in the Sahara desert for as long as there is gasoline being made and replacement parts. Not sure what you are worried about.
  - paganel 8y ago
    > How often do you cross the Sahara desert in a hatchback? You don't That was an extreme example, I agree, not one of the best, just wanted to point out that using gasoline/diesel for vehicle transportation is a lot more failure-resistant compared to a power network. And you said nothing about my point about the entire continent of Africa and about post-disaster interventions in the rest of the world. The last thing you want to hear after your house has been blown out by an earthquake or a tsunami is that the first responders can't get to you and your family because the power network is down so that they cannot move their vehicles. And such events (I mean, major natural disasters followed by extensive power-cuts) do indeed happen pretty often even in developed countries.
    - outworlder 8y ago
      > That was an extreme example, I agree, not one of the best, just wanted to point out that using gasoline/diesel for vehicle transportation is a lot more failure-resistant compared to a power network. It really isn't. It all depends on which kind of disaster we are talking about. In many cases you can't get a tanker where you need to, you have to rely on whatever fuel stockpiles you have. If you have a fuel stockpile, guess what you do? You run a generator. Generator produces electricity, you charge from that. Not ideal, but it's an emergency anyway. This is disregarding other forms of local generation, such as solar. > And you said nothing about my point about the entire continent of Africa The entire continent of africa is bigger than the areas of the United States, India, China and some of Europe combined. I can't meaningfully comment on that large an area. Some places have cities and electricity just fine. Some do not. The places that do not, I have some difficulty accepting that they will also have easy and cheap access to fuel. But assuming it is a problem, then fine. They will take longer to switch. > last thing you want to hear after your house has been blown out by an earthquake or a tsunami is that the first responders can't get to you and your family because the power network is down so that they cannot move their vehicles This is such an enormous strawman! Have you EVER seen an electric fire truck? I haven't(let alone made by VW). But assume there are electric first responders only. You know one thing electric vehicles don't care? It's where their electricity come from. Let's take an example from hospitals. In emergency situations, what do they do? They can't be without power during a surgery. So they have battery banks, backed up by a generator. I guess first responders would do similarly. And guess what, many already have power generators. Even AAA has generator trucks to rescue EVs. If you have electricity you use that(even with no fuel). If you have fuel, you use that – and you can also use electricity. How convenient.
      - paganel 8y ago
        > Some places have cities and electricity just fine. Some do not. Last I read stuff on the matter the country of South Africa had huge problems with keeping the power on 24/7, and we're talking about the most developed country on that continent. > And guess what, many already have power generators. Even AAA has generator trucks to rescue EVs. Power generators that use diesel/gasoline, you're supporting my point, which is that we'll never get over our reliance on this stuff. > You know one thing electric vehicles don't care? It's where their electricity come from. Until your electricity just stops coming from anywhere, at which point they do start to care. You seem to never have been in a situation where electricity is not a constant 24/7 "resource", so to speak. I did live at a time and in a place where that was not the case (meaning constant power cuts even in the middle of winter) and as such I've learned how "brittle" and fragile the power network is. Anyway, I'll leave this discussion as it is right now, I should have learned my lesson a long time ago never to enter into any discussion about EV on HN.
  - citiguy 8y ago
    I’ve been to the Sahara. Believe it or not, there are roads there, and about as much traffic as when you drive across the American West.
- CamperBob2 8y ago
  It's not ubiquitous in much of Africa, which is an entire continent. Somewhat counterintuitively, that might be a good thing for the Africans. There was never a wired telephone network in many populated areas, for example, so they were able to migrate to wireless very quickly with no intervening transition. They never had coal/hydro/nuke plants, but not only will that not stop them from benefiting from cheap solar power, it will accelerate adoption.

Electricity is pretty ubiquitous, not sure why this is a concern?

by danhak 8y ago

Electricity is pretty ubiquitous, not sure why this is a concern?

It's not ubiquitous in much of Africa, which is an entire continent. Also, in case of natural disasters (think big earthquakes, tornadoes) it becomes instantly un-ubiquitous for large swathes of more advanced economies too, that is at the exact moment when you kind of need the first responders to be able to get to you. On the other hand gasoline is much easier to provide, you just need another gasoline- or diesel-powered bigger tanker. Those things can cross even the Sahara desert [1], that is a place where I don't think we'll get to have a reliable power network in the next few centuries, if at all. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeE3VkoDm14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeE3VkoDm14

outworlder 8y ago
How often do you cross the Sahara desert in a hatchback? You don't. You go with specialized, 4 by 4 vehicles. This is a very, very niche application. How many people make this crossing every day? How many people commute to work every day. It's not even in the same ballpark. Why are you trying to optimize for the very rare use-case? You can keep using your trucks in the Sahara desert for as long as there is gasoline being made and replacement parts. Not sure what you are worried about.
- paganel 8y ago
  > How often do you cross the Sahara desert in a hatchback? You don't That was an extreme example, I agree, not one of the best, just wanted to point out that using gasoline/diesel for vehicle transportation is a lot more failure-resistant compared to a power network. And you said nothing about my point about the entire continent of Africa and about post-disaster interventions in the rest of the world. The last thing you want to hear after your house has been blown out by an earthquake or a tsunami is that the first responders can't get to you and your family because the power network is down so that they cannot move their vehicles. And such events (I mean, major natural disasters followed by extensive power-cuts) do indeed happen pretty often even in developed countries.
  - outworlder 8y ago
    > That was an extreme example, I agree, not one of the best, just wanted to point out that using gasoline/diesel for vehicle transportation is a lot more failure-resistant compared to a power network. It really isn't. It all depends on which kind of disaster we are talking about. In many cases you can't get a tanker where you need to, you have to rely on whatever fuel stockpiles you have. If you have a fuel stockpile, guess what you do? You run a generator. Generator produces electricity, you charge from that. Not ideal, but it's an emergency anyway. This is disregarding other forms of local generation, such as solar. > And you said nothing about my point about the entire continent of Africa The entire continent of africa is bigger than the areas of the United States, India, China and some of Europe combined. I can't meaningfully comment on that large an area. Some places have cities and electricity just fine. Some do not. The places that do not, I have some difficulty accepting that they will also have easy and cheap access to fuel. But assuming it is a problem, then fine. They will take longer to switch. > last thing you want to hear after your house has been blown out by an earthquake or a tsunami is that the first responders can't get to you and your family because the power network is down so that they cannot move their vehicles This is such an enormous strawman! Have you EVER seen an electric fire truck? I haven't(let alone made by VW). But assume there are electric first responders only. You know one thing electric vehicles don't care? It's where their electricity come from. Let's take an example from hospitals. In emergency situations, what do they do? They can't be without power during a surgery. So they have battery banks, backed up by a generator. I guess first responders would do similarly. And guess what, many already have power generators. Even AAA has generator trucks to rescue EVs. If you have electricity you use that(even with no fuel). If you have fuel, you use that – and you can also use electricity. How convenient.
    - paganel 8y ago
      > Some places have cities and electricity just fine. Some do not. Last I read stuff on the matter the country of South Africa had huge problems with keeping the power on 24/7, and we're talking about the most developed country on that continent. > And guess what, many already have power generators. Even AAA has generator trucks to rescue EVs. Power generators that use diesel/gasoline, you're supporting my point, which is that we'll never get over our reliance on this stuff. > You know one thing electric vehicles don't care? It's where their electricity come from. Until your electricity just stops coming from anywhere, at which point they do start to care. You seem to never have been in a situation where electricity is not a constant 24/7 "resource", so to speak. I did live at a time and in a place where that was not the case (meaning constant power cuts even in the middle of winter) and as such I've learned how "brittle" and fragile the power network is. Anyway, I'll leave this discussion as it is right now, I should have learned my lesson a long time ago never to enter into any discussion about EV on HN.
- citiguy 8y ago
  I’ve been to the Sahara. Believe it or not, there are roads there, and about as much traffic as when you drive across the American West.
CamperBob2 8y ago
It's not ubiquitous in much of Africa, which is an entire continent. Somewhat counterintuitively, that might be a good thing for the Africans. There was never a wired telephone network in many populated areas, for example, so they were able to migrate to wireless very quickly with no intervening transition. They never had coal/hydro/nuke plants, but not only will that not stop them from benefiting from cheap solar power, it will accelerate adoption.