4 ms·

EVs require a wide and reliable power grid. If the unavoidable climate change is as catastrophic as some predict, that assumption should be challenged. A deep i

EVs require a wide and reliable power grid. If the unavoidable climate change is as catastrophic as some predict, that assumption should be challenged. A deep irony of climate change is that access to remaining fossil fuel resources may be what matters more than luxury consumption items like EVs. Then again, status items have consistently performed better than I expected so my opinion may be flawed.

lazide 4y ago
kinda EVs use the most generic form of power exchange we’ve been able to come up with (electricity), and can be charged from any form of it relatively easily and inexpensively - from low voltage DC to high voltage AC , with various efficiency trade offs - with equipment we know how to design and build, and have been doing so for a long time now. They’re remarkably flexible, and adaptable. If one was sufficiently motivated, you could burn sugar refining leftovers in a boiler run a dynamo to charge, or direct charge off a solar panel array, or charge off a generator, or high voltage grid interconnect (relatively directly) that was available infrequently. Or a power outlet in a house. They’re also remarkably low maintenance mechanically, with much smaller supply chains required, up to the life of the battery. That potentially means they are the most flexible and best option during high change situations. It’s possible to cobble together working solutions in nearly any type of situation. For most current users, they don’t need flexibility, they need convenience (in a specific, predictable set of circumstances), and a stable large interconnected grid definitely enables that. But if the grid is down half the time, gas station pumps won’t work, refineries have issues, etc. too. EVs can still charge just fine when it’s up. It does take time, but in a ‘everything is falling apart’ situation, you either have none or more than you can deal with anyway. So it doesn’t likely change the situation much against it. Hydrogen however is still not worth anything either way. :s
- seydor 4y ago
  > They’re remarkably flexible, and adaptable. I wouldn't say that for cars. BAtteries are great for smaller vehicles and mobility like e-bikes , but an ICE car can go away from civilization, be recharged instantly, carry extra fuel with itself, does not degrade in cold . It's more flexible. Would be interesting to see if the army will use battery EVs
  - lazide 4y ago
    Kinda. ICE fuels degrade rapidly after production and don’t store well for any length of time (gasoline in a gas tank can go bad in a month or so, less if not stored well. Diesel can get fungus if not specially treated to prevent it.). Longer range, and ability to care more fuel is indeed great - due to fuel density. But if refineries are out or distribution networks are screwed, there is no way to effectively make more, and existing stocks go bad quickly. Strategy was often about capturing refineries and oil fields in WW2, as it was absolutely essential that fresh supplies be acquired or everything would grind to a standstill. Current EVs are definitely city queens, but as battery tech improves (better energy density), that is likely to change. And ICE vehicles definitely degrade in cold, quite significantly. Diesels won’t even start without special measures when it gets cold, and diesel fuel without anti gelling agents will solidify. Gasoline engines can choke and/or go fuel rich until the engine warms up, but even then, oils, coolants, etc. often need to be switched or more heavily maintained to avoid freezing. It’s all trade offs. Army’s won’t switch until at least 20 years after the civilian market I’d expect, out of tradition and long established supply chain habits rather than anything else, maybe even 50. It does have advantages too, as you note, regarding density.

lazide 4y ago

kinda EVs use the most generic form of power exchange we’ve been able to come up with (electricity), and can be charged from any form of it relatively easily and inexpensively - from low voltage DC to high voltage AC , with various efficiency trade offs - with equipment we know how to design and build, and have been doing so for a long time now. They’re remarkably flexible, and adaptable. If one was sufficiently motivated, you could burn sugar refining leftovers in a boiler run a dynamo to charge, or direct charge off a solar panel array, or charge off a generator, or high voltage grid interconnect (relatively directly) that was available infrequently. Or a power outlet in a house. They’re also remarkably low maintenance mechanically, with much smaller supply chains required, up to the life of the battery. That potentially means they are the most flexible and best option during high change situations. It’s possible to cobble together working solutions in nearly any type of situation. For most current users, they don’t need flexibility, they need convenience (in a specific, predictable set of circumstances), and a stable large interconnected grid definitely enables that. But if the grid is down half the time, gas station pumps won’t work, refineries have issues, etc. too. EVs can still charge just fine when it’s up. It does take time, but in a ‘everything is falling apart’ situation, you either have none or more than you can deal with anyway. So it doesn’t likely change the situation much against it. Hydrogen however is still not worth anything either way. :s

seydor 4y ago
> They’re remarkably flexible, and adaptable. I wouldn't say that for cars. BAtteries are great for smaller vehicles and mobility like e-bikes , but an ICE car can go away from civilization, be recharged instantly, carry extra fuel with itself, does not degrade in cold . It's more flexible. Would be interesting to see if the army will use battery EVs
- lazide 4y ago
  Kinda. ICE fuels degrade rapidly after production and don’t store well for any length of time (gasoline in a gas tank can go bad in a month or so, less if not stored well. Diesel can get fungus if not specially treated to prevent it.). Longer range, and ability to care more fuel is indeed great - due to fuel density. But if refineries are out or distribution networks are screwed, there is no way to effectively make more, and existing stocks go bad quickly. Strategy was often about capturing refineries and oil fields in WW2, as it was absolutely essential that fresh supplies be acquired or everything would grind to a standstill. Current EVs are definitely city queens, but as battery tech improves (better energy density), that is likely to change. And ICE vehicles definitely degrade in cold, quite significantly. Diesels won’t even start without special measures when it gets cold, and diesel fuel without anti gelling agents will solidify. Gasoline engines can choke and/or go fuel rich until the engine warms up, but even then, oils, coolants, etc. often need to be switched or more heavily maintained to avoid freezing. It’s all trade offs. Army’s won’t switch until at least 20 years after the civilian market I’d expect, out of tradition and long established supply chain habits rather than anything else, maybe even 50. It does have advantages too, as you note, regarding density.