[DaveC113]

I want to buy an LS7 just for some undetermined future project, lol...

On EVs/grid... our gov't has proven it's self incapable of action due to it's organizational structure combined with narrow majorities. For the last couple decades I believe our elected officials have chosen to do what they feel is best politically rather than what's best for our country. Right now we all agree we need infrastructure investment but it can't happen because of this.

IMO it might help if we can vote on some major issues rather than voting for representatives who can't seem to do anything useful. There's always a reason for failure, blaming the "other side", but after decades of ineptitude we do need a change. Hopefully a change for the better that involves direct democracy.

On nuclear, past tech has been a failure because it takes too much energy to build, run, decommission and store radwaste. For every unit of energy put into a nuclear plant we might get 5 units back out, and at a high cost in terms of overall environmental impact. We tend to forget these plants generate A LOT of waste heat as well as radwaste and can significantly raise the temp of bodies of water. The 5:1 number does NOT include long term storage of radwaste. If we were to revisit nuclear we need far superior tech, whish now does exist. I am not sure how much better these are. But for comparison, even wind power is over 20:1 energy return right now, 4x better than legacy nuclear and the equipment is easily recyclable.

[MartinLe]

Originally Posted by ohsmily

No birds stick their heads in the sand. You've bought into a stupid and ignorant myth/idiom along with your perception of technology and society. Not surprising given the poor grammar and syntax of your post. Are you in middle school?

I was referring to Blaq's seemingly over-confident belief in our government's ability to back up (infrastructure) the regulations they impose on us.

Yes, you are correct. There is not a bird that I know of that actually buries its head in the sand. However, I believe it to be a figure of speech that most people understand for what it is. Maybe you should look it up - or ask anyone with a little better grasp of the English language.

Available technology was never questioned - only its use (or lack there of).

And, last but not least, my poor use of grammar and syntax. I'm just having a little fun and cuttin' it up with the boys. The next time I write a paper, I will tighten up my english.

Sorry to have offended you.

[CW3SF]

Without getting down into the weeds on this (I worked at a major power company also) I would just point out that the government can’t just wave a magic wand and make the grid capable of supporting a huge influx of EV demand. The government doesn’t “own” the grid. It’s essentially made up of many many privately owned power companies and their distribution network. And there are even a couple of power companies that are owned by the government. There are government agencies that regulate portions of what happens on the grid but they don’t control it. As a result the “grid” is actually a fairly precarious apparatus that requires coordination between a multitude of entities just to operate on a daily basis. *See Texas during last years weather event or California every time a high demand event occurs. Our “grid” is capable of adapting to meet the challenge but it isn’t going to happen quickly and it isn’t going to be easy. And adding too much demand without careful planning how to support it could be catastrophic to the viability of the grid.

[MartinLe]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

Without getting down into the weeds on this (I worked at a major power company also) I would just point out that the government can’t just wave a magic wand and make the grid capable of supporting a huge influx of EV demand. The government doesn’t “own” the grid. It’s essentially made up of many many privately owned power companies and their distribution network. And there are even a couple of power companies that are owned by the government. There are government agencies that regulate portions of what happens on the grid but they don’t control it. As a result the “grid” is actually a fairly precarious apparatus that requires coordination between a multitude of entities just to operate on a daily basis. *See Texas during last years weather event or California every time a high demand event occurs. Our “grid” is capable of adapting to meet the challenge but it isn’t going to happen quickly and it isn’t going to be easy. And adding too much demand without careful planning how to support it could be catastrophic to the viability of the grid.

You illustrate my point, and many others in this thread, exactly. The government is trying to impose regulations that we are helpless to navigate. "You must have and electric vehicle", but we are not responsible for the support you'll need to follow our rules. But, on the other hand, as someone else stated, electric vehicles are not inherently bad and they seem to be firmly set in our future. But, let them come in their own time as technology and the consumer slowly merge together. You know, evolution, not regu-lution (I made that word up).

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

Without getting down into the weeds on this (I worked at a major power company also) I would just point out that the government can’t just wave a magic wand and make the grid capable of supporting a huge influx of EV demand. The government doesn’t “own” the grid. It’s essentially made up of many many privately owned power companies and their distribution network. And there are even a couple of power companies that are owned by the government. There are government agencies that regulate portions of what happens on the grid but they don’t control it. As a result the “grid” is actually a fairly precarious apparatus that requires coordination between a multitude of entities just to operate on a daily basis. *See Texas during last years weather event or California every time a high demand event occurs. Our “grid” is capable of adapting to meet the challenge but it isn’t going to happen quickly and it isn’t going to be easy. And adding too much demand without careful planning how to support it could be catastrophic to the viability of the grid.

I agree it's not easy but it can certainly be done. The problem is we can't even agree to invest and come up with a plan of action. I think everyone should/would agree improving our electrical infrastructure is important and it's also a national security issue. Yet it's ignored year after year after year because of the personal failings of our leaders and our deadlocked system. It's frustrating how mired in bureaucracy and and petty bickering we are. Where is the USA that built the interstate highway system, etc.?

[MartinLe]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

I agree it's not easy but it can certainly be done. The problem is we can't even agree to invest and come up with a plan of action. I think everyone should/would agree improving our electrical infrastructure is important and it's also a national security issue. Yet it's ignored year after year after year because of the personal failings of our leaders and our deadlocked system. It's frustrating how mired in bureaucracy and and petty bickering we are. Where is the USA that built the interstate highway system, etc.?

That USA probably died with "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Now we're just a bunch of individualists that are only concerned with "what's in it for me?" And, of course, the terminal need for instant gratification.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by MartinLe

That USA probably died with "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Now we're just a bunch of individualists that are only concerned with "what's in it for me?" And, of course, the terminal need for instant gratification.

So you mean, like, the individualists who are against change that will have a global environmental impact just because that means they'll lose out on gas powered engines??

[clg82]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

So you mean, like, the individualists who are against change that will have a global environmental impact just because that means they'll lose out on gas powered engines??

Do you only comprehend what you want to hear or read? You're not paying attention, nobody said they didn't think EV was going to happen, THE COUNTRY/GRID IS NOT READY FOR IT!!! I'm not sure how you're missing what everyone is telling you. I don't think anyone in here is against making the environment a better place, or contributing to the environment in a POSITIVE way. But aside from all of the US going EV you do understand that other countries don't give an F about the environment so how is the US changing our habits going to help influence other countries? Their looking at us and laughing at the predicament we're in now, you think our grid is bad.....i couldn't imagine 3rd world countries and trying to influence them to follow our lead.

[clg82]

Originally Posted by MightyBobo

Conversing with someone on the internet and calling them something they aren't is different than how you communicate with them in person?

Because if you talk like this to people all the time, it's a wonder you don't get KTFO on the regular for being a douchebag. But, welcome to the Internet in 2022, where you can be a douchebag to people and say it's ok because it's on the Internet. "It's YOUR fault that you're offended, idiot!"

The truth is you should respect people on or off the internet, and that guy has done nothing but bring respectful points to the conversation. You, on the other hand, resorted to name-calling. It only diminishes the points you're trying to make.

I said "gramps" for christ sake

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by clg82

Do you only comprehend what you want to hear or read? You're not paying attention, nobody said they didn't think EV was going to happen, THE COUNTRY/GRID IS NOT READY FOR IT!!! I'm not sure how you're missing what everyone is telling you. I don't think anyone in here is against making the environment a better place, or contributing to the environment in a POSITIVE way. But aside from all of the US going EV you do understand that other countries don't give an F about the environment so how is the US changing our habits going to help influence other countries? Their looking at us and laughing at the predicament we're in now, you think our grid is bad.....i couldn't imagine 3rd world countries and trying to influence them to follow our lead.

Do YOU only comprehend what you want to hear or read? You keep making these bold statements and you're trying to present them as facts when it is only your opinion. You have no idea what our grids can handle. You have no idea if we're ready for it. You're just exaggerating because this is something that you're completely against. Your goal is to make it look as terrifying as possible. And let me tell you, it is futile. No matter how scary of a scenario you try to paint to spread fear and misinformation, none of it matters because that train is still coming to the station and it will arrive as scheduled. So do YOU not get the point?

Again, this is not going to happen overnight. It is a gradual change. As the "grid" reaches capacity there will be more and more capacity added to it. Or are you not familiar with how things progress GRADUALLY? Look at the past 20 years and how populations have GRADUALLY increased in size and consumption. Did our supermarkets and farms and water and air and other necessities just immediately deplete? No. So what, FFS, is making you think that a GRADUAL change is going to end in utter disaster? You have no grounds for your thinking. You're just upset. And I get that. I don't care. But I get it.

And again, look at consumption today vs a couple decades ago. Some cities just 20 years ago were straight up just scarce. And now those same cities are booming with businesses like diners, movie theaters, car dealerships, restaurants, hair salons, gyms and fitness centers, schools, houses, apartment complexes, etc. How is this possible with your irrational mindset? It is possible because as more business came to these areas, more capacity was added on a GRADUAL basis. So again, time and technology and innovative thinking are all in direct contrast to your opinion. You have no basis for anything you're saying and you for sure have no evidence or proof or data to support this. If this was all some terribly conceived plan that was doomed for utter failure then like I said before, some of the brilliant minds that are developing it would have thought of everything you said decades ago.

And for your information, how exactly do you know whether or not this has been worked on for decades? You think some idiot just woke up out of a deep sleep in the middle of the night and said "hey guys, we're all going fully electric tomorrow afternoon"...?? LOL!! YOU'RE just now recently hearing about it. This has been in the works longer than you can imagine. The only failure that will happen is your silly resistance.

[passwords]

Originally Posted by clg82

^^This!!! I don't understand why the car manufacturers are transitioning to this so quickly. The infrastructure alone in the US isn't good enough to support this now or in the next decade! I supposed hybrids will still be around but so what if the US changed everything to electric, there are still other countries who don't give a ****.

So what you’re saying is:

[fielderLS3]

I plan to maintain and keep my ICE cars a long time. They'll be worth a fortune someday. The world will run out of (or China will cut us off from) lithium and rare earths long before it runs out of oil.

Today's trend may be EVs, but with the government picking winners and losers and orchestrating it, it may end up that the only cars on the road in 2050 will be ICE cars from 2020. (think Cuba).

[GreenZLE]

Electric cars wont rival gas powered cars until charging can be done as fast as filling up a gas vehicle. A 2 port fast charger is over 60KW. Your home with a 200a circuit breaker for 240v has 48K of available power. The current at home charger takes several hours to charge a car. Consider that every home with 2 electric cars will need at least a 400a service if we stay with 240v to even come close to making home charging EV's as convenient as gas powered cars or we'll need multi port charging stations capable of charging in 15 minutes or preferably less. Either way, the electrical grid and transmission equipment needs a major overhaul AND the power supply needs to increase greatly. Just look up how many cars are in california and calculate how much power charging them will require. Its surprising. More like shocking.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by GreenZLE

Electric cars wont rival gas powered cars until charging can be done as fast as filling up a gas vehicle. A 2 port fast charger is over 60KW. Your home with a 200a circuit breaker for 240v has 48K of available power. The current at home charger takes several hours to charge a car. Consider that every home with 2 electric cars will need at least a 400a service if we stay with 240v to even come close to making home charging EV's as convenient as gas powered cars or we'll need multi port charging stations capable of charging in 15 minutes or preferably less. Either way, the electrical grid and transmission equipment needs a major overhaul AND the power supply needs to increase greatly. Just look up how many cars are in california and calculate how much power charging them will require. Its surprising. More like shocking.

EV #1 starts charging at midnight, finishes at 2 am. EV #2 starts charging at 3 am, finishes at 5 am. Load at the home successfully managed. You are charging over 240V at 48A at the highest( max AC charging with Tesla at least) which is 11 kwh. You can also reduce the amps if you need to share the load. But even if you have two EV's charging at the same time at midnight, using 96A still leaves plenty of headroom on 200A service. Will you be using 104A while you be sleeping? Also DC Fast Chargers are over 150Kw with Tesla rolling out 250Kw fast chargers and will be upping them to 325kw soon.

When the car charges overnight at home while you sleep, does it really matter it takes 2 hours?

Need to have a different mindset of how you would operate an EV over an ICE vehicle and even your phone/iPad/laptop. I already described it back on page 2....

Most of the time you will be charging the car between midnight to 6 am when at home, not at peak hours. You also don't charge to 100% and let it drain down to 10% lets say before plugging back in. For me, I keep my Model 3 at 65% SoC. My commute will have me getting home with 45-47% SoC. I plug it in, have the car scheduled to start charging at 11 PM( off peak for me) and takes about 1.5 hours to charge back to 65%.