4 ms·

Do you mean specifically for the NY market or that fossil fuel power doesn't make sense in general? I know there are some places out West where people may need

by bumby 5y ago

Do you mean specifically for the NY market or that fossil fuel power doesn't make sense in general? I know there are some places out West where people may need to drive very long distances, even for groceries. They literally pack coolers full of ice to transport food back. We can maybe say they need to plan better on their trips, or they shouldn't live in the middle of nowhere, but I don't think that negates the fact there are some cases where gas is a better option (until electric ranges/refueling options are comparable in terms of time and availability) >Electrical infrastructure is extremely cheap relative to other costs like roadbuilding I think I disagree here, especially if you look at lead times. Some transformers literally cannot be manufactured within the US. Others were put in place using infrastructure like rail that no longer exists in that area. These are big risks that really drive up infrastructure cost.

ajross 5y ago
> I know there are some places out West where people may need to drive very long distances, even for groceries. None that don't have power along the way, or at least vanishingly few. Every little town or crossroads you see with a building? Every traffic light? Every railroad crossing with an alarm? That's power. The point wasn't that the EV charging infrastructure exists TODAY to support this, it was that it would be trivial to do within the timeframe required. > I think I disagree here, especially if you look at lead times. The lead time in question is fourteen years! And if you don't believe it just look it up. Stringing a cable is 2+ orders of magnitude cheaper than building a road (much, much more so in areas where you need to blast tunnels or grade mountainsides). The only reason this even looks like an argument is because you presumably feel like "all the roads are already built", but they aren't.
- bumby 5y ago
  I may not have done a very good job of explaining my point. My point is that there's more at play here than just the availability of electricity. >The point wasn't that the EV charging infrastructure exists TODAY to support this, it was that it would be trivial to do within the timeframe required Except it's not just the electricity availability that causes the issue I was pointing to. It's the energy delivery as a function of time. The range upgrade in pumping fossil fuels is currently just much more efficient. One can get 300-500 extra miles of range in less than 5 minutes. Even if electricity is available, it doesn't mean somebody can double their range in a few minutes (which is why I pointing out the planning counterpoint). I'm optimistic the technology will get there, but let's not trivialize the solution as a way of negating one option. >The lead time in question is fourteen years! Is this speaking about building a road? I don't quite follow how the comparison of building roads matters to this...presumably both electric and fossil fuel cars would use the same road infrastructure. Is your point that long road construction lead times means...what? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just don't understand the connection drawn here. Is the point, "Electrical infrastructure is easy because roads are hard and we already do roads"?? >all that's needed is building the right kind of outlets >Stringing a cable is 2+ orders of magnitude cheaper This is what I mean by trivializing the solution. Electrical infrastructure is much more than just 'stringing up cable'. The transformers I mentioned are much more of a bottleneck both from a manufacturing and resiliency perspective. There are some critical ones within the Unites States that would take 18 months or more to be manufactured overseas before even considering how to deliver them when there isn't the normal infrastructure to do so. The idea that we just need to "string up some cable" appears a bit naïve to me and perhaps spoken from a place of lack of domain knowledge.

by bumby 5y ago

ajross 5y ago

> I know there are some places out West where people may need to drive very long distances, even for groceries. None that don't have power along the way, or at least vanishingly few. Every little town or crossroads you see with a building? Every traffic light? Every railroad crossing with an alarm? That's power. The point wasn't that the EV charging infrastructure exists TODAY to support this, it was that it would be trivial to do within the timeframe required. > I think I disagree here, especially if you look at lead times. The lead time in question is fourteen years! And if you don't believe it just look it up. Stringing a cable is 2+ orders of magnitude cheaper than building a road (much, much more so in areas where you need to blast tunnels or grade mountainsides). The only reason this even looks like an argument is because you presumably feel like "all the roads are already built", but they aren't.

bumby 5y ago
I may not have done a very good job of explaining my point. My point is that there's more at play here than just the availability of electricity. >The point wasn't that the EV charging infrastructure exists TODAY to support this, it was that it would be trivial to do within the timeframe required Except it's not just the electricity availability that causes the issue I was pointing to. It's the energy delivery as a function of time. The range upgrade in pumping fossil fuels is currently just much more efficient. One can get 300-500 extra miles of range in less than 5 minutes. Even if electricity is available, it doesn't mean somebody can double their range in a few minutes (which is why I pointing out the planning counterpoint). I'm optimistic the technology will get there, but let's not trivialize the solution as a way of negating one option. >The lead time in question is fourteen years! Is this speaking about building a road? I don't quite follow how the comparison of building roads matters to this...presumably both electric and fossil fuel cars would use the same road infrastructure. Is your point that long road construction lead times means...what? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just don't understand the connection drawn here. Is the point, "Electrical infrastructure is easy because roads are hard and we already do roads"?? >all that's needed is building the right kind of outlets >Stringing a cable is 2+ orders of magnitude cheaper This is what I mean by trivializing the solution. Electrical infrastructure is much more than just 'stringing up cable'. The transformers I mentioned are much more of a bottleneck both from a manufacturing and resiliency perspective. There are some critical ones within the Unites States that would take 18 months or more to be manufactured overseas before even considering how to deliver them when there isn't the normal infrastructure to do so. The idea that we just need to "string up some cable" appears a bit naïve to me and perhaps spoken from a place of lack of domain knowledge.