When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
We've gone down a giant rabbit hole. We may not agree to the cause of all of this--and there probably isn't one right answer for that matter anyways--but my initial question and thought centered on the resultant effects versus what is actually causing all of this.
Things are definitely going to change for us. How we plan our trips. How we maintain our cars. And it's not just the fuel in the car that is changing. Look at the future of self driving. Technology is self-fulfilling; it grows exponentially. Think about it? How much did society change in the way we travel and communicate between 1930 to 1990 versus 1990 to today. Heck, versus 2000 to today.
So, going back to my original question: the more I think about, the more I am uncertain how the value of our ICE cars will be affected during this transition. I really don't know.
Here's the surprise for people who have received incentives for their EVs, and incentivize charging rates.
This is not new nor should it be a surprise, but one of the reasons the cars themselves and their batteries are incentivized, is to fill the storage Gap. That's the Gap where renewables aren't functioning because the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing or the dams have been breached or the nuclear is refueling or the coal fired plants have been shut down.
The scenario that's been presented since the turn of the century, is that all batteries that are charged by the grid, will be required to remain hooked to the grid, for the grid to draw on in times of heavy usage.
Also Tesla Walls and Generac packs are expected to be on standby, as battery backups to the grid.
When this is presented to the public, it may become another third rail (intended pun), but we have seen several posts above about the inadequacy of kilowatt hours - not to mention the infrastructure.
Look into the Aspen Institute's agenda regarding this issue. It's very popular amongst politicians, and their rationale is used to justify radical legislation. Like 50% EVS by 2030.
There already are many communities / co-ops have community solar or other energy source, that use this strategy and require batteries to remain connected to the grid. They are being used as demonstration projects and are quite well received by the big wigs.
You don't really think this is the end of it do you?
You’re talking about smart grid technology which is where the government policy should be focused… how do you make it secure? I’ve heard nada on that front.
This is where a plug-in hybrid would have its advantages.
Tex isn’t this your field of expertise? On the face it almost seems impossible-public acceptance; cost; smart tech at the user level; mandatory?
Here’s one technology that might begin to make present EV’s obsolete. It appears to be a Lower cost disposable car. So many innovator’s and R & D in many forms. https://reporterwings.com/news/healt...transform-evs/
Tex isn’t this your field of expertise? On the face it almost seems impossible-public acceptance; cost; smart tech at the user level; mandatory?
Here’s one technology that might begin to make present EV’s obsolete. It appears to be a Lower cost disposable car. So many innovator’s and R & D in many forms. https://reporterwings.com/news/healt...transform-evs/
Right now there is no security standard (or infrastructure) to implement. Ideal is you charge at night when rates are low, and sell back during peak demand when rates are high. You decide what percent (of your EV State of Charge) you want to sell back during peak demand. Would require Infrastructure to have your EV plugged into the grid where ever it is parked. Depending on rates and how much EV battery range you need that day and how many kWh you sell back during peak demand, you may be able to drive that EV at zero net cost. That’s the idea anyway. Great in theory, difficult and expensive to implement.
Aston Martin Vantage, GLE 43 AMG, Volvo XC60, BMW X1 35i, Ram 1500, BMW Z4 35i
You all realize that EV cars can be controlled by anyone with access... you know like how the government asks Facebook to censure items it doesn't like... imagine the government telling Tesla to restrict use in times of 'natural' emergencies...EV's are just software on wheels... where you don't own or control the software...
California is the first state to make electric cars mandatory. Now it’s telling owners not to charge them
I suggest you read / tell the full story. California is not telling EV owners not to charge their vehicles, it’s asking them to charge outside peak times. And the reason they are doing that is because everyone is running their AC systems in the current heatwave. Better than gas supply lines freezing and people unable to heat their homes because the temperature drops a few degrees.
I suggest you read / tell the full story. California is not telling EV owners not to charge their vehicles, it’s asking them to charge outside peak times. And the reason they are doing that is because everyone is running their AC systems in the current heatwave. Better than gas supply lines freezing and people unable to heat their homes because the temperature drops a few degrees.
I read and see it from another point of view. The point I got from the story is that California currently has few EV’s and don’t have enough power now to meet peak demand. They extended their Nuclear shutdown 10 years. They have no apparent plan for the future. Don’t you see the irony here of asking EV owners to defer charging only a few days after the mandate?
I read and see it from another point of view. The point I got from the story is that California currently has few EV’s and don’t have enough power now to meet peak demand. They extended their Nuclear shutdown 10 years. They have no apparent plan for the future. Don’t you see the irony here of asking EV owners to defer charging only a few days after the mandate?
Not at all. The mandate applies from 2035, not 2022. As I said, they’re not asking EV owners not to charge their cars in 2035. They are proactively asking people to limit electrical usage across all devices during the hours of 4pm-9pm in 2022.
I suggest you read / tell the full story. California is not telling EV owners not to charge their vehicles, it’s asking them to charge outside peak times. And the reason they are doing that is because everyone is running their AC systems in the current heatwave. Better than gas supply lines freezing and people unable to heat their homes because the temperature drops a few degrees.
More to the full story.
A certain percentage of people signed up for new meters, and receive credits, annually and monthly. In exchange for that, they agree to allow the utility to throttle or disconnect their usage in times of high consumption. For them it's not voluntary.
Denver has gone a step further with a similar program, with the additional agreement that the utilities have control of their thermostats. People are complaining about living at 88° at home.
I think in both cases, people can opt out with a certain short notice, but they forfeit their annual bonus. Which was designed to retain participants.
GL 320cdi, Chevrolet Avalanchero, GLE 350 (on order)
Originally Posted by mikapen
More to the full story.
A certain percentage of people signed up for new meters, and receive credits, annually and monthly. In exchange for that, they agree to allow the utility to throttle or disconnect their usage in times of high consumption. For them it's not voluntary.
Denver has gone a step further with a similar program, with the additional agreement that the utilities have control of their thermostats. People are complaining about living at 88° at home.
I think in both cases, people can opt out with a certain short notice, but they forfeit their annual bonus. Which was designed to retain participants.
A quick hit with a hairdryer or putting a bucket of warm water on a stool under will cause the thermostat to read over 88 and kick on the A/C: Rinse and repeat until a comfy 72 ambient is hit.
A quick hit with a hairdryer or putting a bucket of warm water on a stool under will cause the thermostat to read over 88 and kick on the A/C: Rinse and repeat until a comfy 72 ambient is hit.
So, 20,000 people will stand by their thermostats with hair dryers, all day, to defeat the Utility's control of their T-Stats.
They each would use 5,000 - 10,000 BTU/hr "cooling" their house with heat. That could alert the smart electrical meters, with another possibility of being throttled or disconnected, in those areas where Utilities have taken control. It's a strategy that has legs, as we run out of resources.
This isn't the norm right now - YET - but if multiple cities are doing it now, and they all attend the same meetings and read the same Journals, wait for it in your neighborhood.
I doubt that you could heat your thermostat to cool your home and charge your EV all on the same meter, reliably.
As in - "I'm planning a trip tomorrow but I can't charge! My Utility won't allow it."
As in - "Who wants to buy my EV with 7 years on its battery?"
The EV adoption reversal trend is already beginning.
(In keeping with the OP question.)
GL 320cdi, Chevrolet Avalanchero, GLE 350 (on order)
Originally Posted by mikapen
So, 20,000 people will stand by their thermostats with hair dryers, all day, to defeat the Utility's control of their T-Stats.
They each would use 5,000 - 10,000 BTU/hr "cooling" their house with heat. That could alert the smart electrical meters, with another possibility of being throttled or disconnected, in those areas where Utilities have taken control. It's a strategy that has legs, as we run out of resources.
This isn't the norm right now - YET - but if multiple cities are doing it now, and they all attend the same meetings and read the same Journals, wait for it in your neighborhood.
I doubt that you could heat your thermostat to cool your home and charge your EV all on the same meter, reliably.
As in - "I'm planning a trip tomorrow but I can't charge! My Utility won't allow it."
As in - "Who wants to buy my EV with 7 years on its battery?"
The EV adoption reversal trend is already beginning.
(In keeping with the OP question.)
It all depends on the sizing of your electrical service. Hairdryer is about 10a, Car charger is 30a, A/C is 30a, you could even dry your clothes and make hot water on a regular 100a service. I'm currently upgrading my service to 200a before capacity runs out in my area. I also have a 1000 gallon propane tank installed that will feed a genset that will get hooked up by the electrician when he does my new panel. Even if the utility disconnects me, I'll be able to make days of electricity until the propane delivery man gets here.
We are nowhere near running out of resources. A Malthusian mania has gripped our "leaders". I'll just adjust my sails accordingly.
Using the "follow the money" principle, it seems like the U.S. Federal government doesn't care where their tax revenue comes from. Petroleum-based or kWh-based tax money, it's all the same. This assumes no foul play. In the foul play scenario, the EV lobby is "making it interesting" for the government to legislate in favor of EVs. I'm 60/40 toward the no foul play scenario in the U.S.
Contrary to Germany, where a real energy strategy problem exists. Germany relies on others for transportation and heating fuels. They are in a pickle on this point. Germany has a national security advantage to gain by decreasing dependence on petroleum for transportation in favor of renewable and nuclear electricity for EVs. The German government and car companies are aggressive towards EV adoption.
The U.S. really has little to gain in my view by legislating towards EVs. It's the EV lobby vs the petroleum lobby with the electric utilities in the peanut gallery. Much more to come.
Here's more on California's 2035 ICE sales ban. Immediate multiple states following.
"an additional 13 states (Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont) and Washington D.C. have policies tied to California’s, which makes them leading candidates to adopt their own versions of the 2035 ban." https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...-need-to-know/
IMO this draws a line in the sand, as the next four or five years play out with no raw materials. This line in the sand might actually be realized as impractical at best, with backlash going from mutterings to frustrations to anger.
Here's more on California's 2035 ICE sales ban. Immediate multiple states following.
"an additional 13 states (Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont) and Washington D.C. have policies tied to California’s, which makes them leading candidates to adopt their own versions of the 2035 ban." https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...-need-to-know/
IMO this draws a line in the sand, as the next four or five years play out with no raw materials. This line in the sand might actually be realized as impractical at best, with backlash going from mutterings to frustrations to anger.
Colorado just made the News-
Colorado utility company locks 22,000 thermostats in 90 degree weather due to 'energy emergency'
The Colorado customers 'chose to be part of' the program that locked their thermostats, the company said.
According to the article they locked them at 78 degrees, not hard to live with that temperature but…. You can see where this might be going hope I’m wrong. Voluntary, then mandatory-78 degrees, then 88-3-4 hours-then? I’m guessing that the hair dryer idea (while great) will be figured into the mix by watching for rapid changes in the home temperature. Then they could lock you down even more stringently.
This ‘tug of war” to Green everything up vs reality, needs some serious attention soon. We can’t kill Nuclear, Breach Dams and eliminate Fossil Fuels while there are increasing demands for Electricity from more people and EV’s. Clean Power just can’t make up the shortfall.
If things proceed as they normally do in Politics, then crisis management will kick in long after there is time for any reasonable solution.
Edit- Some homeowners reported inside temps in the high 80’s so maybe the 78 is feel good only.
.......We are nowhere near running out of resources. A Malthusian mania has gripped our "leaders". I'll just adjust my sails accordingly.
My point was that we don't have enough green resources to fill the gap.
It's likely we will run out of renewables sooner than we will run out of Petro products.
Think of the thermodynamics of wind, solar, waves and even dams. Removing whatever energy is produced (inefficiently) by those "renewables," affects every system downstream.
And of course, when those kilocalories are taken, they contribute to global warming because they are put to work. Net reduction in global warming? Yet to be quantified.
GL 320cdi, Chevrolet Avalanchero, GLE 350 (on order)
Originally Posted by Ron.s
the hair dryer idea (while great)
I figured this out back in the '80s as a teenager! My mom had an old-fashioned programmable thermostat actuator, like literally it was a little servo that moved the thermostat lever back and forth. That thing was noisy if you changed it and she could detect the sound anywhere in the house. If my sister and I were uncomfortable we would walk by and breathe on it until the system kicked on. Worked for too hot and too cold as the mercury switch would bounce back violently on the spring and kick heating on in the winter. That went on for about two years until she got suspicious and busted me one night.
I've used this technique to force A/C at various offices, hotels etc over the last 40 years or so.
Here’s another simple mathematical thought experiment about what’s driving what. Below is last year’s total vehicle sales.
GM sells more cars in China than in all of the United States at 2.9 million. There isn’t a domestic per state sales figure that I could find, if we assume California represents 10% of GM’s yearly sales total (an educated guess), than GM sells roughly 228k new vehicles in California per year. This ratio is tilted even more towards China for other brands.
It’s not hard to see what is the major driving force. California is a footnote and is not dictating General Motors or anyone else’s business decisions.
Edit: sorry, those values are industry wide and in thousands.
Here’s another simple mathematical thought experiment about what’s driving what. Below is last year’s total vehicle sales.
GM sells more cars in China than in all of the United States at 2.9 million. There isn’t a domestic per state sales figure that I could find, if we assume California represents 10% of GM’s yearly sales total (an educated guess), than GM sells roughly 228k new vehicles in California per year. This ratio is tilted even more towards China for other brands.
It’s not hard to see what is the major driving force. California is a footnote and is not dictating General Motors or anyone else’s business decisions.
Edit: sorry, those values are industry wide and in thousands.
It's already happening! EVs are losing market share in China and the World and the US.
I thought it would take at least 3 years before they started losing penetration.
As Inrecall, GM is transitioning to online orders for EV’s, also a factor.
If I was a Dealer the huge investment to transition to EV’s wouldn’t be my only concern. The looming Factory Direct orders are trending for EV’s and might be an even bigger concern. Let’s see here🤬 Spend a bunch of money on Facility, Equipment and training, the Manufacturer is going to cut me out of the Sales Process, but can tell me how I’ll still make $$$? If the Economy goes into a Recession I need to tough it out. There is significant consumer resistance to EV’s and the EV is in its infancy. Maybe I’ll take my money and run.
I wouldnt dismiss the smaller Markets either…that’s where the growth will be in the future. METRO area sales are likely to stagnate as the cost of EV’s, parking and lack of charging infrastructure vs alternative transportation options become more viable.
Let's be clear, industry sources project EV new production to grow strongly. Very strongly.
Whether posters on this thread like it, or agree with it, has no relevance on the industry forecast, which is based on first-hand or near first-hand information.
Let's be clear, industry sources project EV new production to grow strongly. Very strongly.
Whether posters on this thread like it, or agree with it, has no relevance on the industry forecast, which is based on first-hand or near first-hand information.
@Frenetic 's post above was an "industry source." There are plenty of Federal services that show the same thing.
I think most people posting on this thread think EVs are in the future, but that materials and infrastructure can't support the projections made by regulators and governments.
It's interesting to see how much the EV market share has dropped according to his table.
If I were an automobile manufacturer I would be quite concerned.
And as I said earlier, I was once thinking my next car would be an EV, but the more I look into it, the less attractive it becomes.
There seems to be a lot of PPPPPP* in the materials and infrastructure departments here. That needs to be solved before all these dreams can be achieved. Who would have thought you would need electricity to power an EV? 🤔 Apparently, no one in power.
08-30-2022, 07:58 PM
