#951  
Old 12-01-2019, 08:35 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pork Rind View Post
Sure they do. Go to PlugShare and filter on CCS/SAE for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
According to this, yes. No map or list though.

Tesla Superchargers are also considered level 3.
No no, you must be mistaken. Kent Clark says that EV owners have to stop for four hours in major metropolitan areas to recharge 270 miles. He wouldn’t say that if he wasn’t dispelling the fake news that level 3 chargers exist in the US.

I mean, other than seeing pictures of them on the Internet and using them, I don’t have any proof that level 3 chargers exist in the US. Hats off to Kent Clark for busting that myth!
  #952  
Old 12-01-2019, 08:38 PM
jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 12,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
You want to avoid the point that you have to have an electrician come in and put a 240V line into your garage (or somewhere on the outside of the house) just so you can get a decent overnight charge. Tell you what, I have an electrician coming in a couple of weeks to do some other work, and I'll ask him how much it would take to make my house EV-ready. If this thread is still going then, I'll post it. Maybe it will be what we all consider a small amount, maybe it won't.

I'm really getting fed up with the EV advocates in this thread hand-waving away legitimate concerns about cost, range, infrastructure, etc. Every place in the U.S. ain't southern California, and every EV car ain't a Tesla.
so if I wanted a 240VAC circuit run to my garage to power an arc welder, that would be a ruinous, crazy expense too? We're talking about running a circuit similar to two you likely already have in your house for a dryer and a range. There's nothing special about making things "EV Ready" unless you insist on having a hard-wired charging station installed. The Mustang Mach-E includes a charge cable which can plug into the same 240VAC NEMA 14-50 receptacle that electric ranges do.

but yes, if getting a circuit run to where you park your vehicle is a problem, then maybe an EV isn't for you.
  #953  
Old 12-01-2019, 09:53 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Similar might apply for most of the world, or at least in large cities where the average commute might be only around 4 to 8 km. EVs, especially as PUVs, can do very well.

The problem lies with places with rough roads and/or insufficient infrastructure for electric grids, etc., and these include the outskirts of several towns and cities. That's where ICEVs come in.

Finally, the same applies to the extensive supply chains (usually, thousands of km across oceans and land masses, and involving many countries) to distribute raw materials, components, and finished manufactured goods in general, including ICEVs and EVs, not to mention the materials and components needed for roads, electric grids, related infrastructure, power generation, etc. Substantial levels of ICEs are needed for them, including a large chunk of mining, manufacturing, and transport (e.g., container ships and long-haul trucks). Similar even applies to mechanized agriculture and food processing.

Thus, both EVs supporters and their critics are right. There are limited uses for EVs, but if ICEVs can still increase in use, then that should help in developing EVs.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #954  
Old 12-01-2019, 10:27 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
so if I wanted a 240VAC circuit run to my garage to power an arc welder, that would be a ruinous, crazy expense too? We're talking about running a circuit similar to two you likely already have in your house for a dryer and a range. There's nothing special about making things "EV Ready" unless you insist on having a hard-wired charging station installed. The Mustang Mach-E includes a charge cable which can plug into the same 240VAC NEMA 14-50 receptacle that electric ranges do.

but yes, if getting a circuit run to where you park your vehicle is a problem, then maybe an EV isn't for you.
My circuit panel is not in my garage. It's in my basement, on a different wall. And at some point, a line to my garage is going to have to cross the foundation of my house. But like I said, I'll ask my electrician. Maybe it's a small expense, maybe it isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pork Rind
I didn’t realize that I needed a 240v outlet in order to successfully own and operate my Bolt. I don’t know how I’ve been getting along this past year with just the standard 120v outlet.
I'm getting frustrated trying to learn the Straight Dope here. Because I keep running across posts like this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman
Kent Clark says that EV owners have to stop for four hours in major metropolitan areas to recharge 270 miles. He wouldn’t say that if he wasn’t dispelling the fake news that level 3 chargers exist in the US.
Ravenman, I'm a skeptic, not a shill for the oil industry. I'm not dispelling anything, thank you very much.

Here's plugshare.com. Let's say I want to drive from St. Louis to Branson, Mo. That's a pretty common excursion for us hicks. Google maps says it's 251 miles. Maybe I can make it without recharging. Let's say I can. But when I get to Branson, I'll definitely need to recharge. The map says no Level 3 chargers in Branson. How long will it take me to recharge before I head back to St. Louis?There's a Tesla Supercharger in Springfield, but what if I don't own a Tesla? Now, there IS a Level 3 charger in Lebanon, Mo, which is 101 miles from Branson. Not convenient, but at least it's between Branson and St. Louis, so I guess I should stop there on the way down and back.

A further look at the map tells me it's an even worse situation from Kansas City to Branson. One Tesla supercharger in Springfield, no non-Tesla superchargers once you get out of KC.

St. Louis-Des Moines. 340 miles, no Level 3 chargers or Tesla superchargers along the best route.

This ain't southern California, folks.

Last edited by Kent Clark; 12-01-2019 at 10:28 PM.
  #955  
Old 12-02-2019, 05:28 AM
jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 12,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Similar might apply for most of the world, or at least in large cities where the average commute might be only around 4 to 8 km. EVs, especially as PUVs, can do very well.

The problem lies with places with rough roads and/or insufficient infrastructure for electric grids, etc., and these include the outskirts of several towns and cities. That's where ICEVs come in.

Finally, the same applies to the extensive supply chains (usually, thousands of km across oceans and land masses, and involving many countries) to distribute raw materials, components, and finished manufactured goods in general, including ICEVs and EVs, not to mention the materials and components needed for roads, electric grids, related infrastructure, power generation, etc. Substantial levels of ICEs are needed for them, including a large chunk of mining, manufacturing, and transport (e.g., container ships and long-haul trucks). Similar even applies to mechanized agriculture and food processing.

Thus, both EVs supporters and their critics are right. There are limited uses for EVs, but if ICEVs can still increase in use, then that should help in developing EVs.
WTF do you keep saying “rough roads” are a problem?
  #956  
Old 12-02-2019, 10:44 AM
swampspruce's Avatar
swampspruce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cool Pool
Posts: 4,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Similar might apply for most of the world, or at least in large cities where the average commute might be only around 4 to 8 km. EVs, especially as PUVs, can do very well.

The problem lies with places with rough roads and/or insufficient infrastructure for electric grids, etc., and these include the outskirts of several towns and cities. That's where ICEVs come in.

Finally, the same applies to the extensive supply chains (usually, thousands of km across oceans and land masses, and involving many countries) to distribute raw materials, components, and finished manufactured goods in general, including ICEVs and EVs, not to mention the materials and components needed for roads, electric grids, related infrastructure, power generation, etc. Substantial levels of ICEs are needed for them, including a large chunk of mining, manufacturing, and transport (e.g., container ships and long-haul trucks). Similar even applies to mechanized agriculture and food processing.


Thus, both EVs supporters and their critics are right. There are limited uses for EVs, but if ICEVs can still increase in use, then that should help in developing EVs.
The problem as I see it ralfy, is you're expanding the scope of the OP far beyond the discussion. Many of the points that have been made are still true, however. The trickle down is going to happen in third world countries (which is what you've been talking about for the most part) the same as it will in places like W.Europe and California. As the technology gets better, it will become more common place everywhere.
In some respects , areas that have limited infrastructure have an advantage.
Telco services in parts of Africa have virtually no landlines and almost everyone carries a cell phone. Why? Landline infrastructure is expensive, easy to incapacitate, difficult to install, and disruptive to landowners. Running up cell towers is comparatively easy. Same goes for power distribution. Decentralized power is the way to go in areas where power lines are either difficult to install or prohibitively expensive.

Anything vehicle can be electric or some type of ICE; most of this discussion has been confined to cars because most of us here drive them. Talking about container ships and tuk tuks is ultimately a discussion of another type.
__________________
Life is an economy. Where everything must be traded for something else and the value of all things rise and fall with the amount of attention and effort you put into them. -Mark Manson
  #957  
Old 12-02-2019, 11:59 AM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
My circuit panel is not in my garage. It's in my basement, on a different wall. And at some point, a line to my garage is going to have to cross the foundation of my house. But like I said, I'll ask my electrician. Maybe it's a small expense, maybe it isn't.
Harping on the expense of installing a 240v charger in your house is really not the hill to die on. It's something that most people are going to be able to do for under $1000 one time and maybe spend $250 every decade for maintenance, which is IMO negligible when talking about supporting a vehicle even though I'm using significantly inflated estimates. I think that for the sake of discussion it's really, really safe to assume anyone can put a L2 charger in their own owned house without issue. Where installing chargers becomes problematic is other situations, like if you don't own the property or don't have assigned parking, or if you're someone who spends a significant number of nights parked somewhere other than home.

Quote:
I'm getting frustrated trying to learn the Straight Dope here. Because I keep running across posts like this. (different stuff about chargers)
Using an EV for what could be called 'basic local driving' is one style of use, this is where you have a short or medium commute and make short drives ending at home, like 'home to work then back and some less-far-than-work errands or events, end up parked at home'. This kind of trip can actually work on 120v charging (which only gets 2-4 miles of range per hour), because the daily usage is small and the charging time is long. This kind of driving is what I think Pork Rind is doing with his Volt, and actually works off of a 120v wall charger.

Where the faster charging comes in is if the EV is doing anything past 'basic local driving'. As you start to make longer trips, or to extend the time between charges by spending time at a residence that doesn't have charging available, the 20-50 miles of range you can get from a 120v outlet won't keep the car topped off, and a full charge might not even make the trip (Volt only has 50 miles of electric range, for example). Obviously this comes up on 200+ mile trips, but can also easily be an issue on shorter trips (like my first example which has received so much hostile attention). When I was talking about 'wall charging won't cut it', this is the situation I'm talking about.

The more vocal EV proponents tend to talk as though the 'basic local driving' use case is the only one that most people ever encounter, and dismiss the other ones as weird edge cases. I think that is hilariously inaccurate for most people, and that it's quite likely to end up not charging an EV every day for a variety of reasons and to make trips that don't fit neatly into EV ranges. For another real world example, my parents have needed to make a 220 mile round trip once ever two weeks for the past few months for medical treatment. This is no big deal in an ICE vehicle, even if they decide to add 50 miles to the trip for something fun which they often do (going to the farmer's market, visiting someone in the area, etc). In an EV, unless we're assuming a 2019 model brand new extended range Tesla they can't just make the trip and come home, they're going to have to add in an hour or more of time for charging.
  #958  
Old 12-02-2019, 02:25 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,868
I have had a Nissan Leaf for about a year now. There is a (free!) level 3 Chademo about a mile from my house that I use weekly to get up to 80% in about 30 minutes, and then I use my 120 V home trickle charge to top it off. There are chargers nearly everywhere I go (level 2 or 3), so I also take advantage of these (often free!) chargers when I am at the supermarket or movie theater. I live in the SF bay area, so maybe this is the leading edge of what is to come soon in other areas.

Or, if I'm feeling lazy, I just fill it up with the home 120 V trickle charge and leave it plugged in for awhile. I don't see the need for a 240, as this has all been fine for me so far.

Never been close to running empty.
  #959  
Old 12-02-2019, 03:23 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post

The more vocal EV proponents tend to talk as though the 'basic local driving' use case is the only one that most people ever encounter, and dismiss the other ones as weird edge cases. I think that is hilariously inaccurate for most people, and that it's quite likely to end up not charging an EV every day for a variety of reasons and to make trips that don't fit neatly into EV ranges. For another real world example, my parents have needed to make a 220 mile round trip once ever two weeks for the past few months for medical treatment. This is no big deal in an ICE vehicle, even if they decide to add 50 miles to the trip for something fun which they often do (going to the farmer's market, visiting someone in the area, etc). In an EV, unless we're assuming a 2019 model brand new extended range Tesla they can't just make the trip and come home, they're going to have to add in an hour or more of time for charging.
Fair comments for the most part. I think the only thing we're trying to hammer out is exactly where that line of use for an EV falls for "most people", and how quickly EV's and infrastructure will change to make that group larger.

Personally, I don't think that it's "hilariously inaccurate for most people" But I recognize that's just my opinion. EV's are not a good choice right now for many, particularly in remote, rural areas. But they are a very good choice for many others.
  #960  
Old 12-02-2019, 04:17 PM
enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Fair comments for the most part. I think the only thing we're trying to hammer out is exactly where that line of use for an EV falls for "most people", and how quickly EV's and infrastructure will change to make that group larger.

Personally, I don't think that it's "hilariously inaccurate for most people" But I recognize that's just my opinion. EV's are not a good choice right now for many, particularly in remote, rural areas. But they are a very good choice for many others.
And don't forget people that REALLY use 4x4 and need good ground clearance 6 months out of the year. It will be interesting what comes around on the EV market.

That crossovers are marketed as off road vehicles is a joke.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #961  
Old 12-02-2019, 04:32 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
And don't forget people that REALLY use 4x4 and need good ground clearance 6 months out of the year. It will be interesting what comes around on the EV market.

That crossovers are marketed as off road vehicles is a joke.
Sure.

What we're often looking at is a rural/Urban+Suburban split.

Folks in remote rural locations with harsh weather will need specialized vehicles, and the mass EV market and charging infrastructure is not there yet.

Folks doing commuting in suburban to urban areas are better positioned to use EV's right now.

I think what we're seeing in this thread is a lot of folks in rural areas saying that EV's will not work for them - and in some cases they are saying that most people are just like them. Whereas in actual fact, statistics say that about 46 million Americans live in the nation's rural counties, 175 million in its suburbs and small metros and about 98 million in its urban core counties.
  #962  
Old 12-02-2019, 04:49 PM
enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
...I think what we're seeing in this thread is a lot of folks in rural areas saying that EV's will not work for them - and in some cases they are saying that most people are just like them. Whereas in actual fact, statistics say that about 46 million Americans live in the nation's rural counties, 175 million in its suburbs and small metros and about 98 million in its urban core counties.
Emphasis mine. I've been in a number of discussions on this board about who needs what type of vehicle. IMHO, it's the Urban, City, and Suburban folks that don't understand that people are different. Mostly they can't seem to understand that someone would need a different vehicle than they do. Myself, I don't care what you drive.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #963  
Old 12-02-2019, 05:18 PM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
I think what we're seeing in this thread is a lot of folks in rural areas saying that EV's will not work for them - and in some cases they are saying that most people are just like them. Whereas in actual fact, statistics say that about 46 million Americans live in the nation's rural counties, 175 million in its suburbs and small metros and about 98 million in its urban core counties.
My examples (including the recent one with the medical trip) all involved being in cities or the suburbs directly adjacent to cities with populations of 450,000, 290,000, 132,000, 267,000, and 92,000 people. I'm not aware of any commonly used definition of rural that counts cities of this side as 'rural', typically the largest cutoff is 50,000 people which all of these are larger than. I think you'd end up with a lot more than 46 million Americans in 'rural' areas if you're using half a million people as the cutoff between rural and urban. And like I said before, people in my area don't find living 20-30 miles from work unusual, or bat an eye at driving 10-25 miles to do things like visit someone, go to a get together, visit a particular store, or play a game, and driving 50 miles is something you do occasionally, not a once-a-year sort of trip.

I dispute the implication that 273 million Americans live in areas where driving more than 50 miles in a day is so rare it's an edge case.

Last edited by Pantastic; 12-02-2019 at 05:20 PM.
  #964  
Old 12-02-2019, 05:29 PM
Procrustus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
... And like I said before, people in my area don't find living 20-30 miles from work unusual, or bat an eye at driving 10-25 miles to do things like visit someone, go to a get together, visit a particular store, or play a game, and driving 50 miles is something you do occasionally, not a once-a-year sort of trip.

I dispute the implication that 273 million Americans live in areas where driving more than 50 miles in a day is so rare it's an edge case.

You can do all those things with most EVs on the market today. I bet I drive over 100 miles a day a couple of times a month. I could do it every day and never have a problem. Most days I drive between 20 and 50 miles. It's the "200 or more miles" in a day that I rarely do. I would have range anxiety in a Leaf, based on my driving habits. I have none with my car.
  #965  
Old 12-02-2019, 05:34 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
Emphasis mine. I've been in a number of discussions on this board about who needs what type of vehicle. IMHO, it's the Urban, City, and Suburban folks that don't understand that people are different. Mostly they can't seem to understand that someone would need a different vehicle than they do. Myself, I don't care what you drive.
I totally understand that you would need a very different vehicle than me. And that for you and others, an EV makes no sense at all.

Completely agree.

But an EV does make sense for a great many people.

What my OP was all about was the completely bogus reasons that are made up to "prove" that EV's are no good for ANYONE.
  #966  
Old 12-02-2019, 05:38 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
I dispute the implication that 273 million Americans live in areas where driving more than 50 miles in a day is so rare it's an edge case.
Well, good thing I never said, nor implied this.
I'd say that driving over 200 miles/day on a regular basis is certainly above average, given that the average commute is 32 miles round trip. If you are one of these people, then an EV is not for you. But it does put you "above average".

Also, one can certainly drive more than 50 miles/day with an EV. Not a problem. I know you don't believe this, but it is true.
  #967  
Old 12-02-2019, 06:39 PM
echoreply's Avatar
echoreply is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Well, good thing I never said, nor implied this.
I'd say that driving over 200 miles/day on a regular basis is certainly above average, given that the average commute is 32 miles round trip. If you are one of these people, then an EV is not for you. But it does put you "above average".

Also, one can certainly drive more than 50 miles/day with an EV. Not a problem. I know you don't believe this, but it is true.
And I still say, if you do drive more than 200 miles per day frequently, then take a serious look at whether or not an EV will work for you. Maybe "planning your life around the EV" is good, because it will save money and pollute much less. Maybe the planning is way less complicated than expected. I could easily drive 200 miles per day with no additional planning other than plugging in every night.

Some quick math. These are numbers for me, your numbers may be different. 25 200 mile trips per year, so about every 2 weeks, will cost me $100 in electricity and generating that electricity will create 1700 pounds of CO2. The same 5000 miles in a comparable gas car, say an Audi A4 vs my Tesla Model 3, will cost $450 on 170 gallons (30 mpg), and emit 3300 pounds of CO2. 50 200 mile trips is an even bigger win for the EV.

I wanted to compare cars that are similarly priced and in the same market segment. You can do your gas trip in a Prius, and that will make things not as big of a win for the EV. But, if it's fair to compare to a Prius, then it's also fair to compare to a Ram Power Wagon, in which case it's a huge win for the EV.
  #968  
Old 12-02-2019, 06:43 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
You can do all those things with most EVs on the market today. I bet I drive over 100 miles a day a couple of times a month. I could do it every day and never have a problem. Most days I drive between 20 and 50 miles. It's the "200 or more miles" in a day that I rarely do. I would have range anxiety in a Leaf, based on my driving habits. I have none with my car.
Just don't do it on black Friday.

This all goes back for the need for a faster charging battery. A 20 minute charge time magnifies with each waiting car.
  #969  
Old 12-02-2019, 07:45 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
WTF do you keep saying “rough roads” are a problem?
Because most roads worldwide are rough, and most EVs can't be used on them.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #970  
Old 12-02-2019, 08:02 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by swampspruce View Post
The problem as I see it ralfy, is you're expanding the scope of the OP far beyond the discussion. Many of the points that have been made are still true, however. The trickle down is going to happen in third world countries (which is what you've been talking about for the most part) the same as it will in places like W.Europe and California. As the technology gets better, it will become more common place everywhere.
In some respects , areas that have limited infrastructure have an advantage.
Telco services in parts of Africa have virtually no landlines and almost everyone carries a cell phone. Why? Landline infrastructure is expensive, easy to incapacitate, difficult to install, and disruptive to landowners. Running up cell towers is comparatively easy. Same goes for power distribution. Decentralized power is the way to go in areas where power lines are either difficult to install or prohibitively expensive.

Anything vehicle can be electric or some type of ICE; most of this discussion has been confined to cars because most of us here drive them. Talking about container ships and tuk tuks is ultimately a discussion of another type.
I don't think I'm expanding the scope as the OP did refer to what benefits the majority of people, and I think it's logical to assume that "people" refers to people in general, and not only rich individuals who drive Teslas or similar. I also assume that EVs refer to what's used worldwide.

I don't understand your second point, as cell phone services also require extensive infrastructure. The same goes for even decentralized power.

Finally, I'm guessing that by default it's assumed that "people" in this forum refers only to those who participate in it and not people in general, and thus EVs refer only to what forum members drive. If so, then that should have been clarified in the OP.

One more thing: the reference to container ships, etc., was not meant to move away from the discussion but to show that ICEs are not exactly expendable. If any, they're needed to make EVs, not to mention the infrastructure which they also need to operate.

As for tuk tuks, etc., they're meant to show that not only EVs but even vehicles using other types of fuels (such as LPG) have been used significantly in many parts of the world, but mostly in towns and cities. In the countryside where roads are rough and the need for basic needs to be delivered significant, ICEVs are critical.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #971  
Old 12-02-2019, 08:03 PM
jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 12,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Because most roads worldwide are rough, and most EVs can't be used on them.
Why?
  #972  
Old 12-02-2019, 09:09 PM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Because most roads worldwide are rough, and most EVs can't be used on them.
EVs drive pretty much like similar petrol-powered vehicles. This is just a weird complaint.
  #973  
Old 12-02-2019, 10:18 PM
Gorsnak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskaboom
Posts: 9,448
I too am thoroughly confused by the rough roads thing. A Model 3 can easily traverse probably 90% of the roads in North America. Exceptions would be some remote logging roads, possibly some of the far north in Canada, etc. But typical gravel roads in rural areas are a piece of cake. I routinely drive on such in my Fit, which I'm confident is no better in rough terrain than a Leaf or a Bolt. It just isn't an issue.

At a guess, the percentage would be even higher in Europe. It would be lower of course in less developed areas, but even there most of the roads are passable by relatively normal vehicles. It isn't till you're onto "roads" requiring old Land Cruisers complete with winches to get yourself out of sticky situations that SUVs and pickups can't deal with it, and there are a few SUV/crossover type EVs on the market with several pickups on the way.

On the other hand, it's certainly true that the more capable EVs on the market are notably more expensive than is affordable for the masses in the developing world, so in that sense the current batch of EVs isn't ready for prime time worldwide I guess. Still, I would have thought it was pretty obvious that the thread was mostly about North America.
  #974  
Old 12-02-2019, 10:48 PM
Pork Rind's Avatar
Pork Rind is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
This kind of trip can actually work on 120v charging (which only gets 2-4 miles of range per hour), because the daily usage is small and the charging time is long. This kind of driving is what I think Pork Rind is doing with his Volt, and actually works off of a 120v wall charger.
It's a Bolt. The Volt (now discontinued) was a hybrid, my car is pure electric. 2 to 4 miles of range added per hour from the 120v socket is a little low. I'm gonna do some math here, help me out if I fuck it up...

The EVSE cord that came with my car provides 120 volts at 12 amps. That's 1.44 kilowatts to the car. I'm suspect there's some efficiency loss, but I think it's negligible as my 'theoretical' math here aligns with what I actually see in real life.

So, if I have it right, that's 1.44 kWh added to the battery every hour. My current "around town" driving habits allow me to get 4 to 4.5 miles per kWh.

4 to 4.5 miles per kWh times 1.44 kWh = 5.76 to 6.48 miles of range added per hour.

If I get home at 8p and leave for work at 7:30a, that's 11.5 hours of charging, so that means I get 66 to 75 miles of charge overnight from the 120v outlet. More than enough for regional driving. Even if, as we do, we range as far as Thousand Oaks a couple of times a week (120 mile round trip), the base 240 mile range has enough left over that I can always keep the car ready with just my home setup, even if a couple of the days I start with 50-75% range. It's like having only half a tank of gas and not bothering to top off.

When I go to LA or even up to Monterey, I'm dependent on L3 chargers, but like I said, I've never had to give that much thought, as there's no shortage of those down here.

Last edited by Pork Rind; 12-02-2019 at 10:49 PM.
  #975  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:21 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Because most roads worldwide are rough, and most EVs can't be used on them.
1. Which EV's specifically can't be used on rough roads?

2. Is a tuk-tuk powered by gasoline somehow more able to handle rough roads than a tuk-tuk powered by electricity?
  #976  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:30 AM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
You can do all those things with most EVs on the market today. I bet I drive over 100 miles a day a couple of times a month. I could do it every day and never have a problem. Most days I drive between 20 and 50 miles.
I never made the claim you appear to be disagreeing with. EV proponents jumped all over me for putting such things in my scenario and claimed that I was making up absurd scenarios that bore no resemblance to reality. There was a poster who actually sneered at the idea of using a figure of 10 miles drive for 'going out' on an evening as though nobody would ever drive that much. You appear to be conceding that such scenarios are actually reasonable, which is great but several pages past relevance.

As I've said before and I'm sure people will ignore, the problem is you can't casually do those things with the EVs on the market today if you combine several of them, and/or also do things like stay at a location that doesn't have a charger built in, like real people do, without adding an hour or more charging at stations which also are out of the way except in a very few areas. Unless all of your friends, partners, hookups, relatives, etc. have a charger that you can use at their home, you can't stay at any of their homes overnight if you want to keep these as 'daily' figures.

And while I expect EV proponents to continue to claim that I'm inflating figures, This past weekend in California, the area where charging is supposedly as convenient as gasoline, actual Tesla owners had to spend multiple hours for a single charge. https://www.thedrive.com/news/31274/...r-thanksgiving
  #977  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:39 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
There was a poster who actually sneered at the idea of using a figure of 10 miles drive for 'going out' on an evening as though nobody would ever drive that much. You appear to be conceding that such scenarios are actually reasonable, which is great but several pages past relevance.
I would certainly agree with you that going out on an evening for a 10 mile drive after commuting an above average distance of (say, for example) 50 or even 75 miles round trip should be considered reasonable, and it should be expected that an EV you would buy today should be able to handle this.

I would strongly disagree with this poster who sneered at this idea. Which post was this in? Who sneered at this example? I have lost track.
  #978  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:42 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Ah, just looked up your post #277, in which you posited a trip like:

Quote:
that's 50 miles for the commute, another 20 or so miles for going out, then 25 miles for the commute, 60 miles to friend's house, 60 miles back to work, 25 miles to home. That's 235 miles of driving,
Is this what you referred to as " 10 miles drive for 'going out' on an evening as though nobody would ever drive that much. "??
  #979  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:48 AM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Well, good thing I never said, nor implied this.
Yes, you most certainly have. Your words are preserved in this thread, and I'm long past requoting stuff over and over. It gets really tiring when the most vocal EV proponents won't stand behind what they say.

Quote:
I'd say that driving over 200 miles/day on a regular basis is certainly above average, given that the average commute is 32 miles round trip. If you are one of these people, then an EV is not for you. But it does put you "above average".
"Above Average" is not the same thing as an edge case that's not worth considering, you'd generally expect around half of people to be above average and around half below. "Average commute" bears little relation to "average commute of someone who might reasonably consider an EV", since it will include people who use public transportation, people who walk, and people who live in locations where they can't install a charger. "On a regular basis" and "daily commute" are completely different things, and mostly unrelated (a once a month trip to visit family is 'on a regular basis' and doesn't depend on commute distance). "Miles/day" isn't really the relevant measure, it's "Miles/charge" as people don't always bring their car to their own home with a charger each night.

You have not actually provided any evidence to support the contention that "driving over 200 miles/day on a regular basis is certainly above average", and that figure is pretty irrelevant anyway. A better figure than the average for the entire population would be the figure for people who own (or otherwise possess) cars, as an overall average will be driven down by people who don't drive at all or extremely rarely, but who would not be candidates for replacing an ICE vehicle with an EV in the first place.

Quote:
Also, one can certainly drive more than 50 miles/day with an EV. Not a problem. I know you don't believe this, but it is true.
You 'know' something that is clearly false, as I have not at any point denied that one can drive more than 50 miles/day, and have discussed driving EVs more than 50 miles in a day. I don't believe the latest strawman that you're pummeling, and my posts in the thread clearly show that I don't. You really should just stop the strawman thing.
  #980  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:48 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
I would strongly disagree with this poster who sneered at this idea. Which post was this in? Who sneered at this example? I have lost track.
I'm quite sure Pantastic is talking about me, though the only thing I scoffed at was the reasonableness of adding an extra 20 miles in a scenario where it was not mentioned in the first place except as a vague "going out".

If that's the scenario, then fine. Just don't say a bunch of vague things and then assign numbers later that that turn it from an easy scenario to an edge case. That's goalpost moving.
  #981  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:52 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,188
To be clear, here was the post that started the whole scenario:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
What if you go to work with a 25 mile each way commute, then go out until late, forget to put the charger in when you get home, then want to visit a friend who lives 60 miles away where I'll be parked in a gravel lot with no charger, then come home after the weekend?
To me, that reads like 170 mile plus change. Pantastic later clarified that the trip was actually 235 miles.
  #982  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:59 AM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
I'm quite sure Pantastic is talking about me, though the only thing I scoffed at was the reasonableness of adding an extra 20 miles in a scenario where it was not mentioned in the first place except as a vague "going out".
You scoffed at using any distance for the 'going out' part instead of zero miles, and at least one other person mocked the idea of using even the short 10 mile distance with something like 'oh, and you're living somewhere where nothing is within 10 miles of anything else'.

Quote:
If that's the scenario, then fine. Just don't say a bunch of vague things and then assign numbers later that that turn it from an easy scenario to an edge case. That's goalpost moving.
Again, you shouldn't take a scenario that is loosely described in an off-the-cuff post, make up your own numbers for it and add weird assumptions that don't make sense, then use those numbers to argue that what the person said about the scenario isn't true, then complain that the other person is 'goalpost moving' when they correct you.
  #983  
Old 12-03-2019, 01:12 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
You scoffed at using any distance for the 'going out' part instead of zero miles
That's not true at all. If it were just a few extra miles, I'd have considered that "change". But it was an extra 20 miles, and then you added another commute on top even though you said "then come home after the weekend."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
and at least one other person mocked the idea of using even the short 10 mile distance with something like 'oh, and you're living somewhere where nothing is within 10 miles of anything else'.
That was me, too. I'm allowed a bit of snark. I didn't call you a liar or anything.

Look, I hope it's obvious from this thread that EV supporters have to wade through a tremendous amount of bullshit from the "opposition" (see post 13 back at the beginning). So it's helpful if everyone in a discussion can lay out clearly what their individual scenario is so that we can evaluate if it's something that EVs can support or not. It's immensely frustrating to respond to something and then have it turn out to be something else.

If an EV doesn't work for you, fine--no one claimed otherwise. But let's also do an honest evaluation. They work for a lot more people than is generally thought. The public's perception of EVs is far behind their actual reality.
  #984  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:04 AM
enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
I totally understand that you would need a very different vehicle than me. And that for you and others, an EV makes no sense at all.

Completely agree.

But an EV does make sense for a great many people.

What my OP was all about was the completely bogus reasons that are made up to "prove" that EV's are no good for ANYONE.
Thanks. And similar to people countering your OP, there have been many, many threads where people claim that no one needs and SUV/4x4. I guess I bring it up because many people can't seem to see beyond their own needs. The EV vs ICE / SUV vs sedan debate is somewhat similar.

I'm all for EV's myself. None would work for me at this time though.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #985  
Old 12-03-2019, 10:44 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Yes, you most certainly have. Your words are preserved in this thread, and I'm long past requoting stuff over and over. It gets really tiring when the most vocal EV proponents won't stand behind what they say.

No, I have not.

I have never said, nor implied that "273 million Americans live in areas where driving more than 50 miles in a day is so rare it's an edge case."

You are incorrect. To be kind, you have misinterpreted "my words preserved in this thread". I have quoted statistics that say the average commute is 32 miles round trip. This means that fully half of commuters travel less than this distance to and from work every day. I have repeatedly said that an EV is not for everyone, and there are cases where an EV makes no sense for a particular driver. You included.

You, however have indeed argued that we must take into account that everyone must account for a scenario like "that's 50 miles for the commute, another 20 or so miles for going out, then 25 miles for the commute, 60 miles to friend's house, 60 miles back to work, 25 miles to home. That's 235 miles of driving"

And then you implied that all you said was "10 miles drive for 'going out' on an evening." Actually it turned into 235 miles in order to make your point.
  #986  
Old 12-03-2019, 10:50 AM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,112
I think this entire thread would have a lot less punch to it if auto manufacturers had focused on introducing EVs as the commuter/second car, and then worked everyone up to the idea of replacing a truck/long-range vehicle/SUV, etc.

But Tesla decided to leapfrog and start with a vehicle that put cross-country driving within reach (if not exactly care-free.) Then they muddied the waters even more by building their own charging network, which could only be used by Tesla drivers.

This breaks out to many people arguing from the perspective of - for example - a Nissan Leaf, which is a viable choice as a commuter/second car for most people; vs. a bigger, more expensive, more powerful, longer-range Tesla with a network of high-speed chargers.

I get Tesla's marketing decision to put out the most expensive models first, and let the technology trickle down to cheaper models. But when you're pushing luxury and the rest of the manufacturers are pushing economy, that puts out a highly mixed message.
  #987  
Old 12-03-2019, 01:25 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post



"Above Average" is not the same thing as an edge case that's not worth considering, you'd generally expect around half of people to be above average and around half below.
Nobody ever said Above average is an "edge case that's not worth considering".

You certainly do like putting words in other people's mouths.

Interestingly, I went back in this thread and looked at who has been talking about "edge cases":

Gorsnak initially brought this phrase up in post 173 in response to a post that talked about someone driving 500 miles to a hotel, and needing to immediately charge up using a supercharger. This person said that an EV needed "virtually infinite miles." Gorsnak said this was an "edge case".

Who brought the term up next? You did.
In posts 432 - accused Dr. Strangelove of acting like it's a "weird edge case to consider that people might remember to plug things in"
Post 436 - you repeat your "weird edge case" wording
post 481 - You say that EV drivers pretend that ordinary distances are some kind of weird edge case
Post 483 - you mention "edge cases" again.

You do a lot of accusing others here. A lot.


You seem to do an excellent job of accusing everyone else of doing what you actually do yourself. Good luck with that.
  #988  
Old 12-03-2019, 01:32 PM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
I think this entire thread would have a lot less punch to it if auto manufacturers had focused on introducing EVs as the commuter/second car, and then worked everyone up to the idea of replacing a truck/long-range vehicle/SUV, etc.

But Tesla decided to leapfrog and start with a vehicle that put cross-country driving within reach (if not exactly care-free.) Then they muddied the waters even more by building their own charging network, which could only be used by Tesla drivers.

This breaks out to many people arguing from the perspective of - for example - a Nissan Leaf, which is a viable choice as a commuter/second car for most people; vs. a bigger, more expensive, more powerful, longer-range Tesla with a network of high-speed chargers.

I get Tesla's marketing decision to put out the most expensive models first, and let the technology trickle down to cheaper models. But when you're pushing luxury and the rest of the manufacturers are pushing economy, that puts out a highly mixed message.
Yeah, I think you are on to something. I think there are several affordable electric vehicles out there that are perfectly viable, and moderately competitive, as the city car/commuter car in a household that either doesn't really need a car, or has a second car for long trips. There are certainly some that would work for me if the two of us had two cars to share.

Then there's the Tesla, trying to make a case for a luxury car that's suitable for road trips. And they've kinda succeeded -- I have a couple of friends who use them that way -- but the Tesla is a niche luxury car, not a bread-and-butter car that competes with the junker you take to the train every morning. It does create a weird overall message.
  #989  
Old 12-03-2019, 02:34 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Good points. A LEAF is an excellent city car, great as a 2nd car if you need to do longer road trips in more remote areas with your ICE car. But I do appreciate that Tesla has pretty much put to rest the garbage that I heard a few years ago about EV's in general:

"Just shitty golf carts that have no power. I want a REAL car that can perform."

"EV's can go no more than 20 miles on a charge"


The Tesla Model X and S blew these talking points out of the water.

I think Musk's plan was first to make EV's cool, and something to aspire to, something desirable. And then bring a more affordable EV to the masses. Maybe a dumb plan, maybe not.
  #990  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:00 PM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
That's not true at all. If it were just a few extra miles, I'd have considered that "change". But it was an extra 20 miles, and then you added another commute on top even though you said "then come home after the weekend."
I did not add any miles or another commute to the scenario, I in fact made no change to it. You decided to 'interpret' my scenario in a nonsensical way both by assuming a zero distance for 'going out' and by assuming that the first part of the scenario was not actually part of the trip. And you did this so you could claim that my scenario didn't support the later statement in my post even though with my clarifications it exactly fit the later statement, it was only with your 'assumptions' that it didn't. As I've said before and will repeat, you don't get to make your on assertions and then complain that the other person is 'moving the goalposts' when they point out that your assertions are incorrect.

Quote:
That was me, too. I'm allowed a bit of snark. I didn't call you a liar or anything.
Your 'snark' clearly implied that making a trip to and from a destination 10 miles away was in some way an unrealistic or unreasonable thing to include in an actual use case. It highlights how out of touch the most vocal EV proponents are with actual driving in this thread.

Quote:
If an EV doesn't work for you, fine--no one claimed otherwise. But let's also do an honest evaluation. They work for a lot more people than is generally thought. The public's perception of EVs is far behind their actual reality.
I think that the lack of honest evaluation falls on people who claim that chargers are always conveniently located and never have wait times when Tesla's own website shows plenty of populated area where the only charger is 20 or more minutes out of the way (in one case, 70 miles) and the actual use case for Thanksgiving weekend had people stuck waiting for literal hours to use chargers right in the middle of the area with the best charger availability.
  #991  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:05 PM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
You, however have indeed argued that we must take into account that everyone must account for a scenario like "that's 50 miles for the commute, another 20 or so miles for going out, then 25 miles for the commute, 60 miles to friend's house, 60 miles back to work, 25 miles to home. That's 235 miles of driving"
No I didn't argue that "everyone must account for" that scenario. Just didn't, plain and simple.
  #992  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:07 PM
Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Interestingly, I went back in this thread and looked at who has been talking about "edge cases":
If I was claiming that you literally used the phrase 'edge cases', this might be relevant. But I didn't say that you used the phrase, but rather that EV proponents are treating certain scenarios as weird edge cases when they're not.
  #993  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:27 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
If I was claiming that you literally used the phrase 'edge cases', this might be relevant. But I didn't say that you used the phrase, but rather that EV proponents are treating certain scenarios as weird edge cases when they're not.
No, we're not. You keep claiming this, I know.

There are many people for whom an EV will not work.

If you drive a great many miles in a week and have no access to home charging and the local charging infrastructure is poor - do not get an EV.

Again, the whole point comes down to; How many people will an EV actually work for? I say "quite a large number - in fact, many who have not considered one would actually be ideal cases for getting an EV right now. Plus, in future, the case for buying an EV will be expanded to include even more people as range and infrastructure improves"

Now you might say that what I really mean is that as an EV proponent, I am treating a bunch of ICE drivers as weird edge cases, but trust me, I am not.
  #994  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:33 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,516
I literally had a conversation in another group with a gentleman who was the epitome of goalpost moving.

He started out by claiming that an EV would not handle his 50 km round trip commute, plus trips to the grocery store. When this was conclusively proved false, his commute kept getting longer and more arduous. It started getting comical.

We ended up with him talking about driving weekly from Vancouver to Yellowknife, in the middle of winter - a distance of 2400 km. I was forced to confess that there were no EV chargers on the TŁĮCHǪ Winter Road.
  #995  
Old 12-03-2019, 06:17 PM
swampspruce's Avatar
swampspruce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cool Pool
Posts: 4,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
I don't think I'm expanding the scope as the OP did refer to what benefits the majority of people, and I think it's logical to assume that "people" refers to people in general, and not only rich individuals who drive Teslas or similar. I also assume that EVs refer to what's used worldwide.

I don't understand your second point, as cell phone services also require extensive infrastructure. The same goes for even decentralized power.

Finally, I'm guessing that by default it's assumed that "people" in this forum refers only to those who participate in it and not people in general, and thus EVs refer only to what forum members drive. If so, then that should have been clarified in the OP.

One more thing: the reference to container ships, etc., was not meant to move away from the discussion but to show that ICEs are not exactly expendable. If any, they're needed to make EVs, not to mention the infrastructure which they also need to operate.

As for tuk tuks, etc., they're meant to show that not only EVs but even vehicles using other types of fuels (such as LPG) have been used significantly in many parts of the world, but mostly in towns and cities. In the countryside where roads are rough and the need for basic needs to be delivered significant, ICEVs are critical.
1)Look again. He refers specifically to EVs driving on roads. So, not container ships and not offroad but replacements for vehicles already on roadways, and to be fair in developed nations for the most part. That the discussion has primarily turned to Tesla is due to the fact that they are the most popular passenger EV in developed countries. Further, if you don't have a stable infrastructure already for ICE vehicles, EVs aren't going to fare much better.

2) My second point is that developing infrastructure like a power grid and a landline based telco is vastly more expensive than running up cell towers and decentralized power grids, especially if you don't have/ can't put in decent roads. If you don't have decent roads, it doesn't matter whether you have EVs or ICE vehicles because both are going to be problematic. Finding parts for a Diesel Toyota Hi-Lux in the middle of the Bolivian jungle is going to be just as difficult as a Rivian.
Sometime in the future, you could build an infrastructure to make vehicles easy to mobilize within these places, it would be possible to run renewables and batteries just as easily as gas stations in out of the way places that will require frequent refuelling. Where will that fuel come from? It will have to be trucked or airlifted in. Wouldn't it make more sense to run EVs that have self-filling stations (solar/wind/ pocket nuke...) if you have to start from scratch?

TL;DR The areas that are best served by most EVs right now already have the infrastructure in place. Talking about EVs in the third world leads to a discussion like my second point and that is wide of EP's post.

3) Your reference to container ships is therefore completely irrelevant to road vehicles. Nowhere in the discussions so far has anyone said that ICE vehicle are completely redundant.

4) Britain has had electric milk floats for decades. The point is that those tuk tuks and rickshaws were people or animal powered not too long ago and in time, the same tech trickle down will happen with them as well. As Macgiver has pointed out on this and other threads, the battery tech has to be faster charging and much cheaper. Once that happens, the I suspect you'll see more of the world going electric, too. It will just take longer.

Really TL;DR: The point is that there is a lot of willful misinformation going on and it makes it really difficult to parse whether replacing your car or truck with a pure EV is a proposition worth pursuing for one's unique situation. Unless that's very wide of the mark, I think that's what we were talking about.
__________________
Life is an economy. Where everything must be traded for something else and the value of all things rise and fall with the amount of attention and effort you put into them. -Mark Manson
  #996  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:03 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
EVs drive pretty much like similar petrol-powered vehicles. This is just a weird complaint.
The more expensive ones can. But most used worldwide are like the ones I shared in my previous posts, and they can't.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #997  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:14 PM
Spiderman's Avatar
Spiderman is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 11,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
If you drive a great many miles in a week and have no access to home charging and the local charging infrastructure is poor - do not get an EV.
I think you're seriously underestimating the number of people who live in an apartment & or city rowhouse/brownstone who don't have dedicated parking near an appropriate power source. I think the Dope tends to skew older (which typically means wealthier) so this poll isn't indicative of the population in general.

Secondly, I wouldn't even consider one if I couldn't use home charging. I can fill my gas tank in 4 mins. Last week I actually made a specific trip to the gas station because I only had about ⅓ of a tank & I was leaving a dark:30 the next morning for holiday road trip, before the gas stations opened; even with the drive to/from the gas station it only took me 12 mins & that was to 100% full. It would be a real time waster if one had to regularly fill their car at a charging station instead of plugging in at home. Think how tough that would be if you had young kids & are a single parent, whether full time or just for the night because you spouse is out; especially in inclement weather.

Third, it's not the local charging network it's the 'I'm traveling' charging network that's an issue. Calif is the best at that & even that failed miserably last week as the demand far exceeded the supply. One doesn't have to go far out of their way or take much time to fill up an ICE vehicle; that can't be said for an EV. People with young kids going to see the grandparents &/or people with elderly parents traveling once a month or every other month isn't so unusual. If that trip is 125 miles or more one needs to fill up their vehicle to make it home. Are you putting in a Level 2 charger at someone else's house? What if that's not possible because they're in a apartment/condo/retirement facility? What percentage/how many of Level 3 chargers won't work for you if you have any EV other than a Tesla? Please don't tell me to go somewhere specific like shopping or out for dinner just to charge my car because that is Pantastic's "planning my life around my car"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Again, the whole point comes down to; How many people will an EV actually work for? I say "quite a large number - in fact, many who have not considered one would actually be ideal cases for getting an EV right now. Plus, in future, the case for buying an EV will be expanded to include even more people as range and infrastructure improves"
We won't need the improved infrastructure for driving because we'll all have flying cars by then.

EVs work for people who own their own home & who don't travel, or have two cars which means they take the ICE for roadtrips. For others, we're not there yet.
  #998  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:28 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
1. Which EV's specifically can't be used on rough roads?

2. Is a tuk-tuk powered by gasoline somehow more able to handle rough roads than a tuk-tuk powered by electricity?
Most of the ones I shared in my previous posts can't, and they're mostly not tuk-tuks. They usually have a max. speed of 60 kph and can't handle road slope beyond 15 degrees. There are EVs that can but there are also ICEVs that are cheaper and can do the same amount of work, if not more.

In general, the ones that are most helpful worldwide are BUVs because they can be used for all sorts of things, e.g, commuter and cargo carrier. They usually cost around $1,000 but even cheaper ones can be made using surplus diesel engines. There are EV equivalents depicted earlier but they're not as powerful or not as cheap.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #999  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:53 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by swampspruce View Post
1)Look again. He refers specifically to EVs driving on roads. So, not container ships and not offroad but replacements for vehicles already on roadways, and to be fair in developed nations for the most part. That the discussion has primarily turned to Tesla is due to the fact that they are the most popular passenger EV in developed countries. Further, if you don't have a stable infrastructure already for ICE vehicles, EVs aren't going to fare much better.
My point is that you need container ships, among others, to not only manufacture but even deliver EVs.

About requiring a stable infrastructure for ICEVs, how do you think infrastructure is developed in the first place? Through EVs?

Quote:
2) My second point is that developing infrastructure like a power grid and a landline based telco is vastly more expensive than running up cell towers and decentralized power grids, especially if you don't have/ can't put in decent roads. If you don't have decent roads, it doesn't matter whether you have EVs or ICE vehicles because both are going to be problematic. Finding parts for a Diesel Toyota Hi-Lux in the middle of the Bolivian jungle is going to be just as difficult as a Rivian.
Actually, you need decent roads for both.

Also, you need ICEVs to build decent roads. Actually, it can be done without them, but that takes much longer.

Quote:

Sometime in the future, you could build an infrastructure to make vehicles easy to mobilize within these places, it would be possible to run renewables and batteries just as easily as gas stations in out of the way places that will require frequent refuelling. Where will that fuel come from? It will have to be trucked or airlifted in. Wouldn't it make more sense to run EVs that have self-filling stations (solar/wind/ pocket nuke...) if you have to start from scratch?
Only if EVs, not to mention self-filling stations, can all be manufactured magically. Otherwise, ICEs will be needed to mine resources, manufacture components, and ship them across lengthy supply chains.

Theoretically, though, it is possible to transition to a fossil-free global economy, but it may more than a century to do so. I think the cause is lag time and waste brought about by competition, but to avoid both will involve incredible levels of cooperation between countries, something that we have never seen.

Most important are sacrifices. Given biocapacity, economies have to adjust and meet basic needs first, especially for a population that will continue to increase due to momentum. That's why EVs in the form of BUVs coupled with rail and other means to deliver necessities to communities will be critical, with ICEVs handling what EVs can't using available fossil fuel resources.

Quote:

TL;DR The areas that are best served by most EVs right now already have the infrastructure in place. Talking about EVs in the third world leads to a discussion like my second point and that is wide of EP's post.
EVs are used mostly for towns and cities in the Third World not because of lack of infrastructure but because the EVs that can deal with rough roads are expensive. That's also why ICEVs often used due to lack of infrastructure.

Your second point contradicts your first: you claim that any discussion that involves lack of infra is wide off the OP, but your first point argues that areas with infra in place are best served by EVs.

Quote:

3) Your reference to container ships is therefore completely irrelevant to road vehicles. Nowhere in the discussions so far has anyone said that ICE vehicle are completely redundant.
I was told that EVs can do what ICEVs can, which for me implies that ICEVs are seen as redundant. And yet it turns out that only expensive EVs can, and that even the manufacture and shipping of EVs require ICEVs.

Quote:

4) Britain has had electric milk floats for decades. The point is that those tuk tuks and rickshaws were people or animal powered not too long ago and in time, the same tech trickle down will happen with them as well. As Macgiver has pointed out on this and other threads, the battery tech has to be faster charging and much cheaper. Once that happens, the I suspect you'll see more of the world going electric, too. It will just take longer.
That's why my argument stands.

Do not confuse "will" with "is."

Quote:

Really TL;DR: The point is that there is a lot of willful misinformation going on and it makes it really difficult to parse whether replacing your car or truck with a pure EV is a proposition worth pursuing for one's unique situation. Unless that's very wide of the mark, I think that's what we were talking about.
But the situation I described is not unique.
__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of chipmunks....
  #1000  
Old 12-04-2019, 01:29 AM
RioRico is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
However, I will not stand for complete bullshit concerns. I will not stand for someone giving a blanket assertion of "EV's do not work well on rough roads", and then walking that statement back by saying what they meant was "really cheap EV's" or what they really meant was "Rough roads with no access to chargers whatsoever"

That's bullshit.
You're still on that? If you mean me then [expletives deleted]. I walked back nothing. My statement, which you repeatedly chopped, reads: "I'll agree that even the most rugged EVs can't handle rough roads... where the charging stations are rare and distant. That qualifies MANY rough roads, and blue highways, too." The subject is not rough roads -- unless you think blue highways are unpaved. The subject is currently inadequate infrastructure. Apology accepted in advance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
I think you're seriously underestimating the number of people who live in an apartment & or city rowhouse/brownstone who don't have dedicated parking near an appropriate power source. I think the Dope tends to skew older (which typically means wealthier) so this poll isn't indicative of the population in general.
My drives into California metro areas take me past endless ranks of suburban pre-2000 apartment complexes with detached parking, occasionally covered but rarely with solar cells. Here and there are bulkier "affordable" housing projects with distant, dangerous parking. Then come wall-to-wall urban apartment blocks with down-the-street parking maybe. No 220v or even 120v outlets nearby - these places were not built for EVs. Costly retrofitting likely won't happen anytime soon IMHO, not without massive subsidies, and guards to keep expensive hardware from walking off.

(Circa 1900, many US cities sported kerosene streetlights, each fueled from an unsecured tank in its base. Drivers of kerosene-fired ICEVs quietly siphoned free fuel from those handy civic sources. Maybe every electric lightpole now needs power outlets, as at some Indian casino parking lots I've seen.)

Yes, many scores of millions, maybe a majority of North Americans live, work, and play right now in places quite suited to passenger-hauling EVs. How many of them have nowhere to plug in for a charge? And how many live on unstable power grids?

ICEs dictated 20th-century development. This century, the US EV infrastructure build-out may equally re-stamp housing and living. Or private personal vehicles may mostly be abandoned for autonomous rentals, requiring much less social rebuilding - except converting garages into apartments. Yes, I see housing and vehicle crises intertwined.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017