8 US States Pushing For 3.3 Million Electric Cars 327
An anonymous reader writes "A coalition of eight U.S. states, including New York and California, have announced a plan to get 3.3 million zero-emission electric vehicles onto their roads by 2025. 'The states, which represent more than a quarter of the national car market, said they would seek to develop charging stations that all took the same form of payment, simplify rules for installing chargers and set building codes and other regulations to require the stations at workplaces, multifamily residences and at other places.' An editorial in Quartz says that while the initiative itself is fine, the states should really take cues from Tesla if they want to plan out an infrastructure that will convince people to switch. ' For longer distances, [Tesla drivers] can stop at "Supercharger" stations strategically placed along highways that let them add 150 miles of range in as little as 20 minutes. Currently, [government] money is being spent on installing much-slower chargers at stores, shopping malls and other urban locations in the hope that drivers will use them. Tesla says it will blanket the US with its Superchargers for a fraction of the cost, because it studies the driving patterms of its customers and installs charging stations only where they tend to travel. This isn't hard; most other electric cars also record their drivers' habits. If privacy concerns could be addressed and automakers would be willing to share that data with government transportation planners, the rollout of public charging stations could be more targeted and cash-efficient.'"
One thing is for sure (Score:4, Insightful)
You can be sure that Texas is not one of those eight states.
Re: (Score:2)
I skimmed TFA, Illinois wasn't on the list, either, despite this: [nbcchicago.com]
TFA is fluff, but I still expect to read some interesting comments.
Re:One thing is for sure (Score:5, Funny)
All 8 states have Democratic governors; in fact they're all in one of the two solid blue blocks of the country, the West Coast and the Northeast Corridor. As a Mass. resident, I'm not surprised that 4 of the 6 New England states are represented; of the missing, Maine has a Tea Party Republican governor. Not sure what happened to New Hampshire, but that's a purple state that prides itself on small government.
This is all that Rat Bastard RINO Eisenhower's fault. If it wasn't for his liberal socialist handout program to build the interstate highway system, we wouldn't have this automobile problem.
Re: (Score:3)
He was being facetious.
The interstate highway system was a military defense project that benefited society as well. It was how the massive costs were allowed to happen and for the first time, it was supposed to be paid by the users of the system in the form of a tax placed on the fuels used in the vehicles that used them. In a way, it is no different then the rail systems except that the right of ways were usually granted to private corporations who were later forced to share or allow access to competitors.
My BS meter pegged (Score:2)
This can't work (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand your maths. The article says they are aiming for 3.3 million vehicles. How did you arrive at 100 million?? That would be roughly a third of the cars in the USA! Nobody is expecting EVs to be adopted on that scale within that time frame.
As for the strain on the electrical grid... It may lead to some regional problems as the usage patterns change, but electric cars should not drastically increase the total national demand for electricity. Gasoline consumption will be reduced, and it t
Royalties? (Score:2)
I wonder if these states adopt Tesla's supercharger stations then will Tesla be able to charge $$$ or get royalties from licensing the technology etc...
If so then that could lead them down the path towards being a monopoly, since they'd own all the supercharging stations...
When will hybrid cars be economical? (Score:2)
Some company should try and make a bare bones economical car with electromagnetic return braking. Aim for a short range if you have to 20-40 miles, and have a or a hybrid gas/electric drive. Basically you'd charge at home, so most of your commute is near-free.
A car like this would empower a lot of low income fami
Re: (Score:2)
Companies don't build such cars because people don't want to buy them when they can buy a Civic for the same price or less.
Sure, in theory you could build a $5,000 electric car, but by the time you've redesigned it to meet global auto construction rules it will cost several times as much.
Shortly to be followed by: (Score:2)
Citing diminishment of of revenues from gas taxes, due to the influence of electric cars, 8 states are working to impose a per-mile road tax.
Zero emission electric car (Score:2)
I hate that term as it is inaccurate. While the vehicle may not emit pollutants one is just shifting the emissions to the coal/natural gas fired electricity generation plant. If the cars were not charging the plants would not be emitting as much. It is less emissions that an internal combustion engine but it is non-zero. Sure, you can hook your car up to you PV array or wind turbine but if you are using grid energy it is not zero emission. If the source of the electricity is not zero emission then calling
Re: (Score:2)
You can hate that term all you want, but it's been widely used for decades, and the rest of us aren't going to change our terminology because you posted a comment on Slashdot. Better get used to it.
As for the whole "long tailpipe" argument against EVs, that's so ten years ago. Come back when you get caught up with the debate.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting economics (Score:4, Interesting)
The above only applies to those areas that are able to source their energy locally.
Why this economic fact is important is that it must be taken into consideration when looking at the cost of improving the grid or even putting solar on people's houses. The benefits of not exporting your money can easily outweigh a fairly sizable margin in the cost of fueling the vehicles.
Some small countries with bounties of sun and no fossil fuels will really win when the combination of cheaper batteries and better solar cells become available.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the concept of an oil war will be gone in 20 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the current state of the US electrical grid, I'm not confident it would fare well against a sudden increase of large battery packs being plugged in at once. Yeah, we can setup delayed or offset charging times, etc.
This is a problem with increase in the usage of electric cars in general..... more grid capacity will be needed.
The good news is: less shipping gas around..
The bad news is: lots of construction work.
Maybe some solar panels on the roofs of these facilities, or some $500,000 fuel ce
Re: (Score:2)
Solar isn't going to work for this. Nor fuel cells. There is a solution that will ultimately win. But it will take a radical change in the power distribution network. I'd love to go into detail, but I'm unable to for reasons I choose not to discuss.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually solar can work, you can easily build a 200amp 100% solar charging station.
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/09/02/solar-integrated-ev-fast-charging-station-eco-station-gets-coda-energy-storage-system/ [cleantechnica.com]
CODA energy is putting them all over the place.
Re: (Score:3)
Charge all day long from a photovoltaic panel the size of a parking space. On a sunny day, that energy might get you a few miles, on a cloudy day, it might not get you out of a big parking lot. And that is being generous.
I'm thinking more along the lines of entire buildings' rooves decked with PV cells; so the building is mostly powered using solar, and the reduced building power consumption serves to offset additional capacity demand being pulled by the charger during the day.
Re: (Score:3)
As I've been saying for years - solar carports on every parking lot, giving power & shade. The US Southwest, among other places, would benefit greatly from these.
If the power is being used to charge EVs, you can bill for it.
If not, you're still providing shade and offsetting some of the use of the businesses / shopping centers.
Re:Uh... anyone check electric grid capacity? (Score:5, Informative)
10 m2 * 150 W/m2 * 8 h/day / (150 Wh/km) = 80 km/day. (*)
That covers the average commute quite nicely some of the time. In winter or inclement weather, not so much.
Still, the smugness of travelling gratis - abstracting investments - is seducing.
(*) Conversion to other units, including but not limited to BTU, miles (your pick), square feet and 1/32nds of a fortnight left as an exercise for the reader.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar isn't going to work for this. Nor fuel cells. There is a solution that will ultimately win. But it will take a radical change in the power distribution network.
It is not likely that there are going to be any radical changes to the power distribution network, due to the cost.
I actually think Solar and Fuel cells can work just fine for this, but there need to be enough of them in proximity to chargers, to offset at least a majority of the additional capacity requirement.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell with more grid capacity, how about a grid that is modern and in good condition.
Re: (Score:2)
The bad news is: lots of construction work.
How is more labor needed for construction (you know, actually making shit) in any way bad news?? I have friends in construction.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Uh... anyone check electric grid capacity? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Overall demand has been flagging with no reversal in sight. If anything, this would help generators stay in business.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
You're full of shit. :-P
One of the advantages of electric cars is that with sufficient range (greater than your normal daily usage) the vast majority of charging can be done overnight when power demand is at a minimum, thus using transmission and generating capacity that's currently sitting unused.
Granted, if everybody got an electric car tomorrow that might be an issue, but it's going to be decades before electric vehicles see that kind of market penetration, plenty of time for the power companies to adapt
Re:Uh... anyone check electric grid capacity? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, having a large distributed storage capacity could (if the utilities had any will to take advantage of it rather than just do the absolute minimum necessary to keep the PUC from shutting them down) vastly improve the grid's overall resiliency. Each one of these cars stores roughly the same amount of electricity as a typical house uses in three or four days.
It actually surprises me that Tesla hasn't actively promoted the idea of using the car itself as a necessarily well-maintained whole-house UPS. "Does the thought of losing power overnight cost you precious sleep? Never again! With Tesla's patented bidirectional charging station and crossover inverter, Mother Nature will need to throw more than a few flakes or gusts of wind or downed trees your way to keep you from enjoying the big game!".
And that ignores the possibility of actually tapping into them to help smooth out the peak demand curve - Our baseline consumption would cost us around two cents per kWh, if not for the fact that normal residential rates average that against insane on-demand spikes of 30-60 cents for a few hours a day.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually a viable option in the short term - cars are terribly inefficient and spend most of their time operating the engine well outside it's optimal efficiency band, unlike a power-generating station.
Re: (Score:2)
A powerplant has much higher efficiency than an ICE. Heck, even a Diesel generator is more efficient since it operates at optimum settings.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So... not happening, then.
Re:There is no Magic Energy Fairy (Score:5, Informative)
Large fossil-fuel power plants can be made a lot more efficient than internal-combustion engines, even counting transmission and distribution losses (especially if you count distribution costs for gasoline). Running a car on energy from the electric grid is greener than running on gasoline, even if your power comes from coal plants -- and in most places, not all grid power is derived from coal.
Electric cars are *not* more energy efficient (Score:5, Interesting)
Running a car on energy from the electric grid is greener than running on gasoline, even if your power comes from coal plants.
Not true. In city driving Tesla claim a 292 mile range off a 85kWh battery, or 651kJ/km. Adding in battery manufacture and allowing a generous 1000 cycles, that goes up to 923kJ/km. Allowing for losses in electricity generation (40% at best) and transmission (~7%), the overall consumption is 1653kJ/km.
A medium size diesel gets about 60mpg (UK gallons), equivalent to 1690kJ/km. The difference is just 2%.
Re:Electric cars are *not* more energy efficient (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with this comparison is that it assumes no energy is consumed in producing and transporting diesel fuel or gasoline.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Nonetheless, I applaud the GP for citing actual numbers where I was too lazy to do so (although I'd like to see more detail on the battery-manufacture figures, and 60mpg is better mileage than just about anything you can currently buy in the US). I'd mod you both up if Slashdot worked that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely we aren't being so foolish as to expect honesty from the oil lobby?
Wells to wheels is beyond these people.
Actually they know very "well" that they are misleading, but their target audience hears what they want to hear and feels reassured.
Re:Electric cars are *not* more energy efficient (Score:4, Insightful)
Everything has consequences but highlighting the consequences of one thing while singing the praises of another while pretending it has no consequences is somewhat dishonest. By parroting such dishonestly people are assuming you are a liar instead of just naive.
Re:Electric cars are *not* more energy efficient (Score:4, Interesting)
It doesn't make sense that city driving in a car with the Model S' strong regen braking would be lower than motorway driving at 55 mph, for which the estimate is 301 miles.
So the difference must be because you don't normally charge to the full 81 kWh if you're not going on a long trip aka "range charge"
If you look at the range vs speed curve at http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#range [teslamotors.com] , you'll see that a speed of 30 mph gets you approx. 400 miles which is borne out by the real-world testing of teams in Florida & Holland
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/tesla-model-s-goes-388-miles-in-the-netherlands/ [digitaltrends.com]
So it's about 500 kJ/km.
That difference gets swallowed up by the other factors, assuming they are accurate and you don't say how you derived the numbers for battery manufacturing.
You're also assuming that no energy is used in getting the diesel from well to vehicle tank? According to the DOE, the efficiency of refining and distribution is 83%.
And your number for MPG seems too high but leaving that aside and assuming all other numbers are correct we get 1552 kJ/km for the Tesla and 1690 * 1.17 or 1977 kJ/km for the diesel which is a difference of 22%
Clearly nothing to sneeze at.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops, that should be 1502 kJ/km for the Tesla so the %age difference is 1502 / 1977 or 24%
Re:Electric cars are *not* more energy efficient (Score:5, Informative)
You can run the Tesla Model S on the amount of electricity used to refine the gasoline for an equivalent car. Or put another way: a gasoline car uses as much electricity as pure electric, PLUS the gasoline.
"Chris: It's funny they make that argument, because they're one of the largest users of electricity in the country, to refine gasoline. That's why the power cords go into refineries. Something like 4 to 6 kilowatt hours of electricity to refine every gallon of gasoline. They're pulling that electricity from the same source as they're critiquing on electric cars and they get much less result out of it.
Elon: Exactly. Chris has a nice way of saying it which is, you have enough electricity to power all the cars in the country if you stop refining gasoline. You take an average of 5 kilowatt hours to refine gasoline, something like the Model S can go 20 miles on 5 kilowatt hours. You basically have the energy needed to power electric vehicles if you stop refining.
BI: 5 kilowatt hours, that's to refine and transport one gallon of gas?
Elon: Chris, does that include transportation?
Chris: I think it's just refining. It does not include transporting it from the Middle East or Venezuela. The more efficient your refinery is, the lower that number is. The lowest number in the DOE study I read was 4, and the highest was 7, it depends on what your refinery is."
Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-and-chris-paine-explain-how-the-electric-car-got-its-revenge-2011-10 [businessinsider.com]
Re:There is no Magic Energy Fairy (Score:5, Interesting)
Running a car on energy from the electric grid is greener than running on gasoline, even if your power comes from coal plants
To put some numbers to this, the EPA says that the average car emits 423 grams of CO2 per mile, and that the average US coal plant emits 1216 lb (551 kg) of CO2 per megawatt-hour produced, which is 551 g per kwh. My Nissan LEAF gets about four miles per kwh. Assuming pure coal power, and ignoring line losses, that means my car causes 138 grams of CO2 to be emitted per mile I drive.
Now, the LEAF is a very small, very efficient car, significantly more efficient than most gasoline-powered cars (mainly for range reasons). So comparing 138 to 423 straight up isn't a fair comparison, but even if you assume a normal car is half as efficient as the LEAF, it's still 276 grams per mile vs 423 grams per mile. Throw in some line losses and the gap closes further... but it's pretty clear that electric vehicles cause less CO2 production than gasoline vehicles, on a per-mile basis, even if all of the electricity comes from coal.
For me it's even better because although Colorado is primarily coal-powered, I mostly charge my car only at the office, and my employer (Google) pays a little extra to buy "green" power, mostly wind and hydro, I think. So my car's carbon footprint is much lower. This highlights another aspect of electric vehicles: if we switch to EVs (where appropriate -- they don't work for everything), it is at least possible to replace coal generation with something cleaner. Wind, hydro, wave, solar, nuclear, geothermal... there are lots of clean ways to generate electricity.
I should also note that I, personally, don't care that much. I bought a LEAF not because I was anxious to save the planet, but because it's cheaper to own and operate than a gasoline-powered car, at least for my driving patterns. The fact that it's cleaner is a pleasant bonus. It's also a lot of fun to drive because electric motors have awesome torque and I love how quiet it is. It's a great little car, and I'm very happy with my decision to buy it (lease it, actually... I think EV tech is changing fast enough right now that there's value in being able to upgrade regularly).
Re: (Score:2)
Where do they think the power comes from? Those magic wall sockets most likely are connected to coal burning plants.
This. With apologies to Heinlein, There Ain't No Such Thing As A Zero-Emission Lunch. Your state can switch from coal to all-solar? Great! Good luck on finding zero-emission sources for the components, all of which I'm sure are made from renewable resources. Ditto for wind, and that's our LEAST problematic alternative energy source.
I would dearly love to get the planet, or at least the major consumers, off nonrenewable, polluting energy sources... but we don't have the magic bullet yet. Nothing even
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh how clever you are for noticing that a solar cell takes resources to manufacture.
Is manufacturing a method of producing energy from renewable resources more or less efficient than digging up fossil fuels and burning them for energy? Which one has lower emissions?
Fossil fuels such as oil are used to make other essentials of modern life - plastics, pharmaceuticals, artificial fibres etc. etc., but you think the best thing to do is to burn them into CO2 and water vapour??
Obvious attempted sleight-of-han
Re: (Score:2)
They are? well someone better tell the local electrical plant here they need to use COAL instead of Nuclear. And all the ones around in other cities are all natural gas.
Damn these power plants and their refusal to use COAL!
Speaking of STFU: (Score:3)
Nuclear reactors cannot modulate their level of output several times per day, yet as anyone reading this should know, demand changes greatly over the course of the day. On a minute-by-minute basis, demand is pretty chaotic. That's why the nuclear industry spurred the construction of a great deal of the hydropower capacity that we have today.... so it could actually stay in business.
The interesting thing is that today's deregulated energy markets don't have the stomach to stick with nuclear power projects: O
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, this isn't about "BATTERY-based transportation" so much as about "recharging batteries used in transportation".
If you are just using your electric car for daily commutes, you'll recharge at night when load on the grid is comparatively low, so no problem.
On the other hand, if you're travelling a good distance, and need to recharge a couple times in the daytime, you're just adding to pe
Re: (Score:3)
False. Electric motors are more efficient than ICEs.
You are so fond of pointing out that lithium has to be mined and yet when doing your sums about gasoline you don't include - drilling the crude oil, moving it to a refinery, refining it and then transporting the actual fuel for vehicles.
Perhaps you think that biofuel makes sense? It probably does if you are an Iow
Re: (Score:2)
Well done!
You listed some evidence of less than 100% efficiency in electricity generation and transmission. This shows that fossil fuels are better, how?
You still have a less efficient power plant in the vehicle, as well as your less efficient chain from well to fuel tank
The greenest choices are public transport, 2nd hand fuel efficient car (no point in demanding a *new* car if there are serviceable ones already built) and then consider electric if you absolutely must have a new car and you can afford el
Re: (Score:2)
The first six items in your list also apply to the huge amounts of electricity consumed by oil refineries in the production of gasoline!
Re: (Score:2)
True, but energy *sources* are fungible in an electric system. That makes a huge environmental difference, as we're not forced to bear unreasonable *marginal* costs for energy technologies that have environmental dis-economies of scale.
Local shortfalls of wind or solar can be alleviated by a more efficient grid, but even if they are as unreliable as you claim, every 24 kwh net of wind energy put onto the grid is roughly one gallon of petroleum saved and 20 lb of CO2 emissions saved.
Re: (Score:2)
Couple of points to make...
Coal is already on the decline in the USA, being squeezed out by cheaper (and much cleaner) natural gas. The Chinese, on the other hand, are building coal plants like crazy.
Many people don't realize that those magic oil refineries are most likely connected to coal burning plants too. Oil refineries use enormous amounts of electricity. I've seen an estimate that refining a gallon of gasoline requires as much electrical power as you need to move an electric car the same distance,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are fewer and fewer coal burning plants; the local news had an item about a coal company shutting down a mine around here a few weeks ago. CWLP in Springfield just built a new gas powered generator a couple of years ago, most of our power was coal, now gas. The coal plant only fires during peak need.
This revolution in powering devices is at its infancy. Thirty years ago the only zero-emission plants were nukes and hydro, but wind, geothermal, and solar have started coming online. I hope coal will be o
Re: (Score:2)
This is correct. The solution is not ready yet. People forget how bad pollution was with horses, and how much cleaner gas-burning cars were. A buildout of the current grid to handle electric cars is incredibly wasteful.
Re: (Score:3)
Check out the grid utilization from Midnight to 6am in any timezone. Would it surprise you to know the load is generally less than 40% of peak? Assuming reasonable charging models, there is no need to radically expand the electric grid.
And no, it is not zero emission, but certainly using an electric vehicle produces far less direct polution than driving a typical ICE car.
Re: (Score:2)
Or just get uneducated americans to stop freaking out about having a small nuclear reactor under the hood. That would be my solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We are not ready for mass adoption of electric cars, but the technology is not yet cheap enough for that yet anyway. By the time the technology does get cheap enough, and starts trickling down to the majority who have rarely if ever bought a new car in their lives, we will have had plenty of tie to start shifting to more sustainable power generation.
For that matter we could roll out high-efficiency gasoline generator power plants that will burn far more cleanly, and generate far more power per gallon, than
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, also worth mentioning - the shift towards electric cars creates the promise a vast and lucrative new high-dollar market for *good* batteries (safer, cheaper, and/or more environmentally friendly) - which makes the necessary R&D far easier to justify, bringing significant attention to a technological field that had been largely languishing.
Re:still doesn't compute (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes if you are standing around waiting for it. If they had slow charging stations in parking locations it doesn't matter, and at some locations a 20 minute gas stop is normal even for gasoline cars. Last time I took I-80 westbound we had to wait for 15 minutes to get to a pump, then 5 minutes to pump with another 10 minutes to wait for traffic to get out of my way so we can get back on the highway. Instead, if there was a charging station at the oasis I would plug in, go inside to use the bathroom, get a coffee, and walk back out in those 20 minutes instead of sitting in my car while the guy with the F950 pickup truck fills both his 300 gallon gas tanks.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That is assuming that nobody else has a leccy car already hooked up to each pump.
More likely you would sit there waiting at least 20, possibly 30min to get a charging plug then continue as you described. Since if there really is that long of a petrol line leccy would be long as well... if not, it will be.
Re:still doesn't compute (Score:5, Informative)
It costs tens of thousands to add more gasoline pumps. An electrical charging spot costs less than $900 and are trivial to install.
Really doesn't compute (Score:3)
Yes if you are standing around waiting for it. If they had slow charging stations in parking locations it doesn't matter
That's fine if 0.05% of cars around are electric. But it's totally unrealistic to think anything justifies the expense of putting an electric charging unit into every single parking spot.
Even if there aren't ever very many electric cars, you have to worry about non-electric cars taking up your spot. And if you decide that there are going to be some electric-only spaces now you have reduc
Re:Really doesn't compute (Score:5, Interesting)
You're not reducing the capacity of a parking lot when you hook up spaces at places people already go. I've noticed libraries with electric car charging parking spots -- most people stay inside a while, so good spot. Grocery stores or all kinds of stores would be an obvious spot. It doesn't have to provide a full charge in the time people are shopping either, it just has to be a simple routine that tops off the battery in the course of normal activity.
As far as long distance highway trips, existing highway rest areas would be an obvious spot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Really doesn't compute (Score:5, Interesting)
That's fine if 0.05% of cars around are electric. But it's totally unrealistic to think anything justifies the expense of putting an electric charging unit into every single parking spot.
No, its not unrealistic.
If the shopping center can put in electric charging spots gradually as the demand increased, the investment might be easily manageable.
Further, if they make a few cents on the electricity/b they sell you, these slots will pay for themselves, unlike current parking spots which
usually generate no revenue themselves, and are funded by increased prices in the stores.
Places like Fairbanks Alaska have plugins for headbolt heaters so you can get your car started after sitting out in 50 below
while you shop. Lots of these are free as well, but then the draw is way less than required to charge.
Re: (Score:3)
Because the same people who like to push "green" solutions also like to do so via government mandates.
Government is the last refuge of scoundrels.
When you find yourself in a chicken and egg problem it is usually because you are acting too soon. Forcing charging stations so that marginally effective electric vehicles can be justified is a classic ploy. Getting the government to require it is the cheapest path for big auto, and the greens will pile on for free.
Tesla is willing to provide free charging, and
Re: (Score:2)
Reduced availability of fossil fuel for personal transport is coming.
You do not wait until the Sacred Flawless Infallible Invisible Hand (Praise Be to Holiest Holy of St Rand!) acts when you know what is going to happen, you plan for it.
Re: (Score:2)
nice rant.
But again, I reiterate:
Tesla is willing to provide free charging, and a usable range. All built at their own expense.
Re:Really doesn't compute (Score:4, Interesting)
But it's totally unrealistic to think anything justifies the expense of putting an electric charging unit into every single parking spot.
The expense is paid by the person sliding his card through the reader on the charging station, you think you're going to get free electricity? A charging station should be a lot cheaper than a gas pump, there are few parts needed and nothing mechanical to assemble. And in the right climate a parking lot could have solar panels shading the cars, free money for the parking lot owner.
Re: (Score:2)
The more electric cars there are, the more reason to hook up charging spots, unlike gas filling which requires having a person there to monitor things.
Totally not the case. I've been to many a late night gas station where I never saw an attendant and filled up just fine.
As for you having to monitor it - that's not a burden when it takes a minute! At an electric station you'd have to spend the same amount of time arranging payment, but then you have 20+ minutes to wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Really doesn't compute (Score:2)
Good idea. But now the problem is securing the transaction and getting a data connection into the plug (socket standardization).
Re: Really doesn't compute (Score:4, Insightful)
Not about government, about economics (Score:4, Insightful)
All this blather and government planning and so on.
I said nothing about government planning. I'm not sure your comment was directed at me?
What I said is that it's not feasible to put charging stations in every parking spot. It is insane. There's no way you will ever make a return on that investment.
Electricity is the future of autos; but not the kind where your car needs charging via electric cables to every home or parking spot.
Re: (Score:3)
What I said is that it's not feasible to put charging stations in every parking spot. It is insane.
I cannot say for sure if they are at all parking spaces, but in Alaska....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/doc100/7396598454/ [flickr.com]
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/02/electric-cars-in-alaska/ [wattsupwiththat.com]
So if our neighbors in the crispy cool north do it without an issue, what makes it impossible or insane in the rest of the country? This is not only possible, but we have a sort of prototype out there already. Next up is to start doing Nuc plants again.
The utter lack of "possiblenous" in so many slashdotters makes me
Re: (Score:3)
"what makes it impossible or insane in the rest of the country?"
From what I can see, the rest of the country has a lot of really really stupid people.
I blame high fructose corn syrup.
Re: (Score:2)
If they had slow charging stations in parking locations it doesn't matter, and at some locations a 20 minute gas stop is normal even for gasoline cars. Last time I took I-80 westbound we had to wait for 15 minutes to get to a pump, then 5 minutes to pump with another 10 minutes to wait for traffic to get out of my way so we can get back on the highway
I like how you just assume that won't be the same when electric cars are common.
Using your same metrics, 5 minutes to pump after 15 minutes waiting, means three cars were ahead of you. Also implied is that one car arrives
every 5 minutes so that the 15 minute wait time persists.
With a fast charging Tesla, those three cars will take an HOUR to charge. Further, in that hour 12 cars will arrive.
With other cars like the Leaf, the charge time is 4 hours, so I'm not even going to do that math for you.
Re:still doesn't compute (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, they are still sub-optimal for long road trips. However, as long as you can get a full day of normal driving in on a single charge, and recharge overnight in your own garage the picture looks much better, especially as a primary car where the second car where the other is gasoline powered. Weight it largely irrelevant to most people - once you can't pick it up it's just one more factor in the efficiency and performance characteristics. And cost, well that is what it is for now, the early adopters always pay a premium.
As someone said "There's nothing wrong with electric cars that batteries with twice the capacity at half the cost wouldn't fix", and there's plenty of promising new battery technologies on the horizon, we just need one of them to make it out of the lab.
Re: (Score:2)
Long road trips along well traveled routes, maybe. But not when there are 30 cars ahead of you lined up to charge.
The Tesla is the only car that can charge in 20 minutes. All the others seem to require hours.
Twice the capacity at half the cost sounds like a Moore's law of batteries, but we simply have not seen such progress in battery technology.
Probably because we have two other considerations to weigh, namely recharge time and weight. If twice the capacity can be accommodated in
the same weight, fine. B
Re: (Score:3)
Which doesn't really matter since the entire point is pollution shifting from street level in crowded cities to power stations with high stacks and a pile of pollution controls behind them (since it's not 1970).
The lead time on battery technology is getting very short - stuff from less than a decade ago is commercially available. Comp
Re: (Score:2)
How long does it take to charge a 'regular' car? Mine typically takes about 10 minutes because the pumps in large stations are relatively slow and I need 20 gallons. Most people take about 15 minutes (paying cash inside, getting snacks etc). And that 20 minutes is just for the current technology, I anticipate that within 5 years this can be halved. And 20 minutes would only be on long distance trips (>4 hours). Most trips (groceries, work, family and friends) can be done in 4 hours and then you just char
Re: (Score:2)
15 minutes?
Try closer to 5.
The US fuel flow rate [epa.gov] at filling stations is 10 gallons per minute.
Your twenty gallon tank is full in two minutes.
Allow another minute for fumbling with your wallet, swiping in your card at the pump.
Nobody pays cash inside these days. And I don't need snacks every time I fill up the tank.
Re: (Score:3)
The US fuel flow rate at filling stations is 10 gallons per minute.
That's the maximum allowed by law, not the standard. Read your own link. No pump I've seen goes anywhere near that fast.
Re:still doesn't compute (Score:5, Informative)
Unlike you, I know where this equipment comes from.
There are only a few (less than 9) providers of gas pumps in the US, and they all compete.
Fast delivery is key to profitability of gas stations in busy areas.
The reason the EPA had to limit delivery rates was to prevent tank venting from blowing right by the
recovery system. The EPA insisted they dial back the deliver rate.
10 GPM is not difficult to achieve.
How GPM A 1/2 inch pipe can deliver per minute depends on the pressure. If you have low pressure (flowing out of a slightly elevated tank), you can get about 7 gallons per minute. For average pumped pressure, you can assume you will get around 14 gallons per minute. If you have it set on a high pressure, you can easily get 21 gallons per minute. The nozzle of an unleaded delivery hoze is 0.840 inch, the inside diameter is slightly larger than 1/2 inch.
However the vapor recovery systems can't handle the vent fumes coming out of the tank when it is being filled that fast, so stations were required to dial down the pressure. This is one of the things a State weights and Measures inspector checks.
Re: (Score:3)
I keep seeing this claim, and honestly can't quite figure it out - I mean sure, the Tesla S doesn't quite have the sexyness of a Bugatti, but y'know, when you have the Veyron in for detailing, you have to let the chauffeur drive something.
Re: (Score:3)
Electric cars still look quite unattractive to me. I keep seeing this claim, and honestly can't quite figure it out - I mean sure, the Tesla S doesn't quite have the sexyness of a Bugatti, but y'know, when you have the Veyron in for detailing, you have to let the chauffeur drive something.
The people who think electric cars are ugly are often the same people that think a Hummer3 or a Escalade are attractive.
Re:still doesn't compute (Score:5, Insightful)
IF you have your car in a garage and charge it overnight, then you may rarely ever need to charge it away from home -- only for road trips, really. Depending on your driving habits, you may go months without visiting a charging station.
Even then, if you have a Model S and stop at a Supercharger station, you'll have the option of paying for a battery swap, which can get you back on the road in about two minutes.
Finally... Remember that even 3 million cars is only about 1% of the cars in the USA. Today's electric car technology can't meet everyone's needs, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine it meeting the needs of 1% of the population. Things can grow from there as the technology continues to improve.
Re: (Score:3)
And I'm sure the owners tend to travel where there are charging stations.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, the federal government is giving a $7,500 tax credit to save $6,000 is gasoline.
Re: (Score:2)
exactly what was centrally planned for the populace in that case? centrally planning to send a handful of people to the moon isn't centrally planning transport for 350 million people
Re: (Score:3)
You're totally right, and I think the industry is keenly aware of this, and they are working on how to address it.
Gasoline cars have been mass-produced and cost-reduced for decades. It's really quite amazing to look at the cost of an internal combustion engine and see just how cheap they are, considering the materials, parts and tolerances that they require to produce them. The same can and should happen to electric cars, but it just doesn't happen overnight, and it won't ever happen without them being in
Economics don't work (Score:2)
That $10k differential, if invested, could pay a return that would cover most of your gas.
Fuel, or cars in general, need to get much more expensive for this to make sense. Better to start the transition now, and hey - props to everyone buying a Tesla.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even a coal power plant is more efficient than your car's engine.