4 ms·
I don’t see how this article isn’t cherry picked. - How about those in cold climates where batteries don’t last nearly as long. - upper middle-class and highe
by codeddesign 5y ago
I don’t see how this article isn’t cherry picked.
- How about those in cold climates where batteries don’t last nearly as long.
- upper middle-class and higher only? Most apartments don’t have hookups. Those that do don’t have enough for 10% of the residents. How many home have hookups? How many families have $10k laying around to install hookups?
Beyond the fact that it’s not reasonable at all for most Americans, no electrical grid would be able to handle it.
It takes 2 minutes to refill you car with petrol. Most people don’t have the patience to wait 4 hrs for a fillup.
Electric vehicles for near majority is not realistic at all right now.
At the moment, this is a “cool” novelty, but not an option for most.
- 0x964 5y agoAdding a 220 outlet isn't outrageously expensive and it is only needed once as it will work with any future EVs. Adding a circuit and outlet to my garage cost $500 and I use the charging adapter that came with the car. And as for the grid not being able to handle the load - we were able to roll out air conditioning to every home in a couple of decades. I believe this is a solvable problem.
- TheRealWatson 5y agoA solvable problem but not in the time-frame to support these 41% that are thinking about it for their next car.
- virtualdom 5y agoIf half of American commuters switched to EVs, the daily energy demand on the grid would only increase by 10-15%. The difference between peak load and average load is close to 30%, so we could handle that new EV load with the existing generation capacity. We just need market solutions to incentivize owners to charge during off peak hours, which most utilities already have via time-of-use rates and EV-specific plans.
- virtualdom 5y agoTo be more clear: the US grid with its existing generation capacity could certainly handle 41% of consumers switching to EVs. We would simply not ramp down as many power plants at night as we do now [1]. However, that would result in this additional marginal demand being satisfied mostly by fossil fuel plants: natural gas and coal, which currently ramp up and down on a daily basis. What is more likely to occur is that the new marginal demand caused by EVs will be satisfied by new capacity from solar and wind farms. Areas with good solar capacity (CA, FL, the southwest) will incentivize EVs to charge during the day, and areas with more consistent wind capacity (the midwest) will incentivize charging at night. Coal plants will increasingly close for economic reasons, while existing natural gas plants will continue to run at lower capacity factors. Depending on how electricity and carbon markets are structured, and how the costs of different generation technologies and fuels change in the future, there's a good chance that the US grid of the future will look like how I described, and that people will pay less of their income on energy services, and that the air in cities and homes will be cleaner, and that people around the world will be less at risk from the effects of climate change. [1] https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/electric_overview/US48/US48/ElectricityOverview-2/edit https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/el...
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago>How about those in cold climates where batteries don’t last nearly as long. Like Norway where EV's have over 55% of the market? https://www.electrive.com/2021/04/07/norway-registers-84-8-marketshare-of-plug-in-cars-in-march/ https://www.electrive.com/2021/04/07/norway-registers-84-8-m...