[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by clg82

Umm what^^ here in Cali the sun shines 90% of the year every year, and we aren't even close to being able to sustain everyone on an electric vehicle. We can't even run our AC without them turning it off in the hottest days of the summer and you think California is ready for an all electric vehicle transition? Drink some coffee man, your response sounds like a grumpy old 80 year old dude that pulled a muscle getting out of bed.

The grid is most definitely an issue on the near horizon. There simply arent enough reliable renewable energy sources available to supply adequate power at this point in time. And the movement that’s pushed EV production is also staunchly against those power sources which are capable of propping up the grid (natural gas and nuclear). They’ve already pushed out most of the use of coal (formerly the most relied on resource for the grid).

Now they are going after natural gas and petroleum, which largely replaced coal on the grid. You can generate enough power with nuclear but (1) they are against nuclear also and (2) nuclear is slow to bring online and offline - meaning that a considerable amount of “quick on/off” generation is needed in order to manage the grid on an ongoing basis..ie coal, natural gas.

Wind/hydro don’t make enough of a dent in the grid to be much of a factor either way.

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by clg82

Umm what^^ here in Cali the sun shines 90% of the year every year, and we aren't even close to being able to sustain everyone on an electric vehicle. We can't even run our AC without them turning it off in the hottest days of the summer and you think California is ready for an all electric vehicle transition? Drink some coffee man, your response sounds like a grumpy old 80 year old dude that pulled a muscle getting out of bed.

I dont expect him to get it because he doesn't live here on the left coast. Its kinda putting the cart before the horse when Sacramento decides that we need to be all electric but has no plan to support it. Even if they can get the ball rolling, it may very well be another "bullet" train debacle.

Just saying, this state should be a prime candidate for big solar energy yet we have to "flex" our power or it'll get shut off. We have plenty of ev's here and they're great for commuting, Have nothing against it. But to completely phase out ICE's in favor of them I feel is pretty lame, discontinuing these engines seems to only be the beginning. In the example of CA, the free market isn't deciding anything, its the government and car companies to push us to all EV.

But whatever I'll keep my camaro until I physically can't drive it anymore, maybe I'll check out a new electric Hummer.....11,500 lb ft!

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

The grid is most definitely an issue on the near horizon. There simply arent enough reliable renewable energy sources available to supply adequate power at this point in time. And the movement that’s pushed EV production is also staunchly against those power sources which are capable of propping up the grid (natural gas and nuclear). They’ve already pushed out most of the use of coal (formerly the most relied on resource for the grid).

Now they are going after natural gas and petroleum, which largely replaced coal on the grid. You can generate enough power with nuclear but (1) they are against nuclear also and (2) nuclear is slow to bring online and offline - meaning that a considerable amount of “quick on/off” generation is needed in order to manage the grid on an ongoing basis..ie coal, natural gas.

Wind/hydro don’t make enough of a dent in the grid to be much of a factor either way.

Then the whole situation blows up in their face, like it does here in CA (power shuts off), and they act like they could have never seen it coming or have systems in place to prevent it. You nailed it on the head

[clg82]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

I dont expect him to get it because he doesn't live here on the left coast. Its kinda putting the cart before the horse when Sacramento decides that we need to be all electric but has no plan to support it. Even if they can get the ball rolling, it may very well be another "bullet" train debacle.

Just saying, this state should be a prime candidate for big solar energy yet we have to "flex" our power or it'll get shut off. We have plenty of ev's here and they're great for commuting, Have nothing against it. But to completely phase out ICE's in favor of them I feel is pretty lame, discontinuing these engines seems to only be the beginning. In the example of CA, the free market isn't deciding anything, its the government and car companies to push us to all EV.

But whatever I'll keep my camaro until I physically can't drive it anymore, maybe I'll check out a new electric Hummer.....11,500 lb ft!

Please no...

[birdmanf16]

I believe the plan for the grid is to use the energy stored in the ev's during peak hours to reduce the strain on the grid. So, all the ev's will be connected and helping to offset the load with stored electricity in the cars. Seems logical to me.

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by birdmanf16

I believe the plan for the grid is to use the energy stored in the ev's during peak hours to reduce the strain on the grid. So, all the ev's will be connected and helping to offset the load with stored electricity in the cars. Seems logical to me.

That’ll never work. Peak demand is in the morning when everyone is getting ready for work and evening when everyone gets home and makes dinner, does laundry etc. or when there’s a weather event. Those times vary slightly by geographical area and time zone. Do you want them trying to pull stored power from your EV when you are trying to charge it? Do you plug it in for their availability when it doesn’t need a charge? Doesn’t make sense to me.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

That’ll never work. Peak demand is in the morning when everyone is getting ready for work and evening when everyone gets home and makes dinner, does laundry etc. or when there’s a weather event. Those times vary slightly by geographical area and time zone. Do you want them trying to pull stored power from your EV when you are trying to charge it? Do you plug it in for their availability when it doesn’t need a charge? Doesn’t make sense to me.

While not going to comment on the viability of pulling the energy from an EV as a way to deal with surge in power demand( I agree probably not viable), a few misconceptions.

1. When it comes to EV's, keep it plugged in when at home( if you have a home charger, etc) is what you want to do. The car will manage itself and does not do any damage to the battery. It allows preconditioning the car to draw from the house and not from the battery, etc.

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%.

Some of this talk of EV's straining the grid is a bit overblown in the sense that only people going to DC fast chargers will be charging during the day. Most of the time, the EV will be charging off peak in the middle of the night while you sleep.

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

While not going to comment on the viability of pulling the energy from an EV as a way to deal with surge in power demand( I agree probably not viable), a few misconceptions.

1. When it comes to EV's, keep it plugged in when at home( if you have a home charger, etc) is what you want to do. The car will manage itself and does not do any damage to the battery. It allows preconditioning the car to draw from the house and not from the battery, etc.

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%.

Some of this talk of EV's straining the grid is a bit overblown in the sense that only people going to DC fast chargers will be charging during the day. Most of the time, the EV will be charging off peak in the middle of the night while you sleep.

Good points and I appreciate that. My viability concerns are with the push to force them on the entire population, which is where things appear to be headed. If we could stay in the current state of EV ownership being the exception to the rule, their plans may work. With our entire population trying to charge EVs overnight the grid will have a new peak demand period lol.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by clg82

Umm what^^ here in Cali the sun shines 90% of the year every year, and we aren't even close to being able to sustain everyone on an electric vehicle. We can't even run our AC without them turning it off in the hottest days of the summer and you think California is ready for an all electric vehicle transition? Drink some coffee man, your response sounds like a grumpy old 80 year old dude that pulled a muscle getting out of bed.

I sound like an 80 year old dude? Funny. Cause I'm not the one who's scared of new technology nor am I the one prematurely talking about "well back in my day".

It's not happening overnight. It's a gradual change. The system will adapt and expand as more and more people switch. I mean, you're sitting here acting like this is all going down on Thursday next week. No change happens immediately. But in order for change to occur it has to start somewhere at sometime. Carb'd cars were still in production when fuel injection started showing It's face and for some time after that. Eventually more and more people switched and carbs fell off. The same will happen with EVs.

And just so you know, most likely the mass public will be fine with the switch. It's just a relatively few who won't. But that's not going to change the fact that EVs are on their way in and ICEVs are dying out.

[clg82]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I sound like an 80 year old dude? Funny. Cause I'm not the one who's scared of new technology nor am I the one prematurely talking about "well back in my day".

It's not happening overnight. It's a gradual change. The system will adapt and expand as more and more people switch. I mean, you're sitting here acting like this is all going down on Thursday next week. No change happens immediately. But in order for change to occur it has to start somewhere at sometime. Carb'd cars were still in production when fuel injection started showing It's face and for some time after that. Eventually more and more people switched and carbs fell off. The same will happen with EVs.

And just so you know, most likely the mass public will be fine with the switch. It's just a relatively few who won't. But that's not going to change the fact that EVs are on their way in and ICEVs are dying out.

Umm what? Go back to sleep grandpa, the argument is that the infrastructure isn't here (California) or anywhere for that matter within the United States. There won't be 10 years from now, there won't be 20 years from now. The question we're all asking is why make the push and start canceling gas powered engines when (like you said) it's not happening next Thursday. Unless you like that cancel culture type thing....than you may be younger than 80......

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

Good points and I appreciate that. My viability concerns are with the push to force them on the entire population, which is where things appear to be headed. If we could stay in the current state of EV ownership being the exception to the rule, their plans may work. With our entire population trying to charge EVs overnight the grid will have a new peak demand period lol.

No doubt the grid will need to be upgraded, but there is plenty of time to do so. The transition will not be overnight.

I will disagree with the "forced" statement. Manufactures are changing over on their own will. Tesla is well on track to break 1 million sales this year( globally). We just need the charging infrastructure and more affordable( hello $30K Equinox EV) EV's for better viability for a lot of the population.

But hey despite being a fan of good EV's, I do miss the sound of the V8 from my Camaro SS. I love all good cars, ICE or EV. Both bring for me wonderful driving experiences. Different and it all comes down to taste, but I loved driving the Camaro and I love driving my Tesla. If I can ever afford it, a C8 Corvette will join the garage along with the Model 3.

[Evansa22]

Not trying to bash EV's as much as pointing out the issues which could arise. Power outages because of demand is already nothing new in this state. They've had many years to turn it around yet here we are with the same problems, adding some strain to the system will only exacerbate the problem. These are also my views based on living in this area my whole life, I'm sure many others acrossed the country will be different. Hopefully they're not gonna use this state as a blueprint for the rest of the country because it could get ugly. Technology will always move forward however and hopefully more viable options will be discovered. I dont think the impact of all these batteries which will need to be built (precious metals), and eventually discarded or possibly recycled, will be realized until further down the road. Who knows,, Maybe next they'll be a push for Flintstone style vehicles, better start doing more legs. Now that will be zero emissions, unless you count farts

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by clg82

Umm what? Go back to sleep grandpa, the argument is that the infrastructure isn't here (California) or anywhere for that matter within the United States. There won't be 10 years from now, there won't be 20 years from now. The question we're all asking is why make the push and start canceling gas powered engines when (like you said) it's not happening next Thursday. Unless you like that cancel culture type thing....than you may be younger than 80......

Not sure why you're messing with Blaq, his posts have been pretty reasonable. Acccusing him of cancel culture bs is completely uncalled for, too. I'm as unhappy with this forced PC EV push as you are, but I always say let's have a discussion and consider each other's points.

If there were no mandates and ICE cancellation plans whatsoever, people would still buy some EVs, because there are scenarios they are optimal for: people who hate or are indifferent to driving, short distance city commutes or shopping trips, availability of a garage for overnight charging. I'd also get one for the wife if any were available at a reasonable price that are actually functional for a family (and don't look like a turd, heh).

Were it up to me, EVs would simply come alongside ICE as an additional, and in many cases, welcome, option. Speaking to your point, this would also slow adoption to a rate that allows the required infrastructure adjustments to be considered and made, you know, in a common sense fashion. Doesn't look like we are headed that way, but then this also doesn't mean EVs are the devil's work.

[MartinLe]

Originally Posted by clg82

Umm what? Go back to sleep grandpa, the argument is that the infrastructure isn't here (California) or anywhere for that matter within the United States. There won't be 10 years from now, there won't be 20 years from now. The question we're all asking is why make the push and start canceling gas powered engines when (like you said) it's not happening next Thursday. Unless you like that cancel culture type thing....than you may be younger than 80......

Hey, give Gramps a break - what do you expect out or those "baa, baa" people? Oops, sorry I think I'm confused. Do those big birds that stick their head in the sand go, "baa, baa"?