Hybrid Electric Vehicles

[ytz]

Not solar without batteries to store it as most vehicles are charged at night.

I know economics is hard for some. But most owners would try to charge when electricity is the cheapest. The cars have functions to load rate schedules and will charge accordingly. Right now, that's at night for most people. But if there's a surplus of solar during the day that makes charging cheaper during the day that's when charging will shift to. We are already seeing this in places like California which have a surplus of solar. That's literally the purpose of time of use pricing: to shift consumption behaviour.

Given that average car commuter does 40 km each way, and average consumption of an EV is 15-20 kWh per 100 km, that works out to 12-16 kWh per commute. Given that a NEMA 5-15 has a theoretical max of 1.8 kW, if we assume 1.5 kW, an average outlet at a work parking spot could provide 70-100% of the charging needed of the average commuter over an 8 hr work day. This isn't nearly as difficult as people imagine. And we'll get to the point where most regularly used long duration parking have a basic outlet at them. No different than plugs for block heaters.

 

[YZT580]

You didn't worry about it before. You don't need to worry about it now. Demand drives capital investment. There will be plenty of investment into power generation and grid expansion.

Whatever is cheaper and more efficient will win.

Those two statements say it all. Go for a free market system without the enormous amounts of cash that are currently being spent on subsidies and let the market decide. With what we have invested in battery plants we could have had another pipeline or two up and running providing jobs and a good income to a hell of a lot more folks than all those windmills contaminating much of south-western Ontario. We could have developed and opened new copper mines to provide the raw materials for the infrastructure needed to support the AI age and our electric bills would be low enough to entice high energy users to our jurisdiction. We could have several new natural gas power stations up and running providing stable power to both us and to NY state when their grid starts to fail: which it is. Let the markets decide!

 

[Good2Golf]

I won't say "no". I will say minimal. They are giving away the cars and can't sell them. You are so committed. Why don't you have one? Literally every sale helps them right now.

As the car reviewer pointed out, the cars themselves are ridiculous. The infrastructure is non-existent for most of the world.

I have consistently held the ‘worthy of consideration’ (not everyone transition to them now, infrastructure notwithstanding) position on HEV/FCEVs, noting that BEV/PHEVs aren’t the ‘end-of-EVolution’ that you and others make them to be. Your static BEV/PHEV is and always will be the pinnacle of personal vehicle development is inconsistent. ICEVs are dodos, the future market has spoken today on HEV/FCEVs and they’re already in decline. Your position is clear, BEV/PHEVs are the bomb. Got it.

Personally, I’m going to run my current, fully-paid clean diesel SUV until it becomes impractical to sustain. I suspect that will be 10+ years. I remain interested in and will watch my neighbour’s continued experience with his Rivian R1T BEV pick-up. If for some reason I change my intended vehicle path in the near-term and consider a BEV, it would be something like the R1T I would buy/invest in. If my plan for my continue vehicle works out and I’m looking for a a new vehicle in 10 years, I will absolutely look at HEV/FCEV options.

Out of interest, are you an all-EV family?

 

[PuckChaser]

Apply all the tax rates in the cost of gas to any electricity used by an EV charger. I think the "cost savings" gap would close significantly.

 

[captloadie]

Those two statements say it all. Go for a free market system without the enormous amounts of cash that are currently being spent on subsidies and let the market decide. With what we have invested in battery plants we could have had another pipeline or two up and running providing jobs and a good income to a hell of a lot more folks than all those windmills contaminating much of south-western Ontario. We could have developed and opened new copper mines to provide the raw materials for the infrastructure needed to support the AI age and our electric bills would be low enough to entice high energy users to our jurisdiction. We could have several new natural gas power stations up and running providing stable power to both us and to NY state when their grid starts to fail: which it is. Let the markets decide!

If you watch the Caleb Hammer clip posted in the Cost of Housing discussion, you'll see how this train of thought (let's rely on our nation's natural resources) will continue to stagnate our economy, and we'll continue to move closer to our African cousins as a country.

 

[Kirkhill]

Those two statements say it all. Go for a free market system without the enormous amounts of cash that are currently being spent on subsidies and let the market decide. With what we have invested in battery plants we could have had another pipeline or two up and running providing jobs and a good income to a hell of a lot more folks than all those windmills contaminating much of south-western Ontario. We could have developed and opened new copper mines to provide the raw materials for the infrastructure needed to support the AI age and our electric bills would be low enough to entice high energy users to our jurisdiction. We could have several new natural gas power stations up and running providing stable power to both us and to NY state when their grid starts to fail: which it is. Let the markets decide!

We could have been building clean, green Combined Heat and Power Incinerators in every city.

How Sweden Sends Just 1% of Its Trash to Landfills

The country incinerates nearly half its garbage to create the energy that powers its homes and buildings.

reasonstobecheerful.world

What it does with the other half is what sets Sweden apart from much of the world. Nearly all of Sweden’s non-recycled waste is burned to generate electricity and heat. It’s a method that, while emitting CO2, is far better for the climate than sending garbage to landfills, according to the Swedish government and proponents of waste-to-energy technology. “Energy recovery is the best available technology for treating and utilizing the energy in different residual wastes that can’t easily be recycled,” says Klas Svensson, a waste-to-energy technical advisor at Avfall Sverige, Sweden’s waste management association. “For many other countries in Europe, it represents an opportunity to both replace Russian gas, and at the same time phase out landfilling.” It also happens to earn Sweden a good deal of money.

Sweden was an early adopter of waste-to-energy. Its first plant started operating amid a post-war home-building boom in the late 1940s. The new houses were connected to district heating networks, which generate heat at a central location and pump it out to individual homes, rather than each house having its own boiler. Over the years, more of the energy powering these district heating networks was supplied by waste-to-energy power plants, with major expansions beginning in the 1970s. Today, Sweden has 34 waste-to-energy plants supplying 1,445,000 households with heat and 780,000 households with electricity — impressive figures for a country with a population of only 10 million.

Hydrocarbons to plastic bags. Plastic bags as fuel.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I know economics is hard for some. But most owners would try to charge when electricity is the cheapest. The cars have functions to load rate schedules and will charge accordingly. Right now, that's at night for most people. But if there's a surplus of solar during the day that makes charging cheaper during the day that's when charging will shift to. We are already seeing this in places like California which have a surplus of solar. That's literally the purpose of time of use pricing: to shift consumption behaviour.

Given that average car commuter does 40 km each way, and average consumption of an EV is 15-20 kWh per 100 km, that works out to 12-16 kWh per commute. Given that a NEMA 5-15 has a theoretical max of 1.8 kW, if we assume 1.5 kW, an average outlet at a work parking spot could provide 70-100% of the charging needed of the average commuter over an 8 hr work day. This isn't nearly as difficult as people imagine. And we'll get to the point where most regularly used long duration parking have a basic outlet at them. No different than plugs for block heaters.

I am not opposed to EV, but the option of even being able to plug in even a 110v line at night is not there for many people. I personally think Hybrids achieve 80% of the solution without the major infrastructure requirements. I am opposed to any more subsidize for EV and expect that owners pay a road tax that goes to road upkeep like everyone else does.

Going by reports I have seen by Tesla owners, that in the cold areas, a 110v extension cord to a car outside will struggle to charge and most of the input will be used by the battery thermal management system.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Where did the electricity come from when everybody got air conditioning? Where did the electricity come from when the internet took off and we built data centres? Where will the electricity come when we need more data centres for AI? By the way, the average charging load for a commuter using an EV is the same power draw as an air conditioner overnight.

Some political jurisdictions and parties are more hostile to large infrastructure projects than in past decades, and large projects take longer to complete than they used to. It's usually not prudent to assume that something can be approved and completed before at least one major change of political affiliation in the responsible governments. That risk gets factored into planning and go/no-go decisions. When the NDP government took over in BC, the continuation of Site C dam construction was not assured; the question should never have been in doubt. Politicians will cancel expensive undertakings on a dime to suit themselves (eg. Chretien and helicopter acquisition, BC NDP and work towards a bridge replacement for Massey Tunnel) and block private projects as well.

The projections I've seen for anticipated expansion of supply do not match projections for anticipated increase of demand. The ordinary functioning of competitive markets cannot be guaranteed against political interference.

 

[YZT580]

If you watch the Caleb Hammer clip posted in the Cost of Housing discussion, you'll see how this train of thought (let's rely on our nation's natural resources) will continue to stagnate our economy, and we'll continue to move closer to our African cousins as a country.

Never said that. What I said was that with the money spent we could have gotten a much bigger bang. The harvesting of resources must go hand in hand with industrial development. We are building battery factories but not developing the mines needed to supply the raw materials. With China putting a limit on their export and with most other sources not available (no development in those countries either) those plants will never come close to breaking even. ytz says that charging my EV takes the same power as my air conditioner. OK. Many power grids won't support adding an air conditioner to every home. A lot of homes are still on 60 amp service. So we need more copper, and more rare metals (sourced from China) to upgrade our systems. We export most of the copper mined here instead of developing the industry to use it. We should be exporting the finished product. So yes, relying on our natural resources is a good way to become a third world country. But relying on those same resources to feed industry and shipping the finished product would put us ahead of the game. We need those cheap energy sources. Our labour costs far exceed China's and Viet Nam's to name but two, but cheaper power would keep us in the game and we need those factories