4WD
$50 site donor 2024
That part is all fine and good … but CA is doing serious long term financial damage in other ways …
If/when electrics take over
- Thread starter ShutdownCorner
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by IMPALA08
The greenies and three humpers want to run your life.
I imagine you're too young to remember when the finger lakes of NY were dying off from acid rain induced by coal emissions from the Midwest.
... or L.A., 1948 to 1990:
![[Linked Image]](https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*5RU9AlyLT-VHpEDHwCFpJQ.jpeg "[Linked Image]")
-- 1958 picture, L.A.
Originally Posted by IMPALA08
The greenies and three humpers want to run your life.
I imagine you're too young to remember when the finger lakes of NY were dying off from acid rain induced by coal emissions from the Midwest.
... or L.A., 1948 to 1990:
-- 1958 picture, L.A.
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
I've heard bad things about lithium in batteries. I'll let real scientists like UCS & others make the call though.
Yet, it could be the best solution is to use the smaller less massive ~1.5 kWH batteries in normal hybrids (RAV4, Fusion, Camry, C-Max sized vehicles) that average 40 MPG in mixed driving. That way you avoid the large mega-sized ~80 kWH expensive monsters in pure EVs.... And, a hybrid is great on long road trips, just refuel as usual, no range issues.
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
I've heard bad things about lithium in batteries. I'll let real scientists like UCS & others make the call though.
Yet, it could be the best solution is to use the smaller less massive ~1.5 kWH batteries in normal hybrids (RAV4, Fusion, Camry, C-Max sized vehicles) that average 40 MPG in mixed driving. That way you avoid the large mega-sized ~80 kWH expensive monsters in pure EVs.... And, a hybrid is great on long road trips, just refuel as usual, no range issues.
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
That article says that only the frames, glass etc are recycled right now, not the cells themselves. That part is apparently coming.
So as of now, where do you think the cells end up?
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
That article says that only the frames, glass etc are recycled right now, not the cells themselves. That part is apparently coming.
So as of now, where do you think the cells end up?
Last edited:
Originally Posted by millerbl00
Gasoline would go UP as demands goes down. It would not be profitable to sell it. Already seeing this in the hobby industry as electrics take over.
Maybe short term, but it wouldn't last...prices going up when demand drops just goes against every economic model...
Gasoline would go UP as demands goes down. It would not be profitable to sell it. Already seeing this in the hobby industry as electrics take over.
Maybe short term, but it wouldn't last...prices going up when demand drops just goes against every economic model...
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
That article says that only the frames, glass etc are recycled right now, not the cells themselves. That part is apparently coming.
So as of now, where do you think the cells end up?
The point is, science and resulting technology can be used to solve problems.
There are people who have problems for every solution; others see opportunity.
Bill Gates once said he did not think anyone would ever need more than 64K of memory.
Back in the 60's who ever thought we would have the ultra low emissions engines of today?
When I started in semiconductor manufacturing in the early 90's, 65 nm tech node was the norm. Simply amazing.
I understand Intel's new 7 nm 3D Nand chips act as a 3 nm trace. Good Lord...
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Some of you guys talking about long term game don't see the environmental damage the battery and solar panel manufacturing makes because as usual, as long as it is not in your back yard, it doesn't exist.
Solar panels are actually toxic and cannot be recycled, but as long as it gets shipped to some third world country to be dumped there, everything is good.
Very green thinking indeed.
Solar Panel Recycling
That article says that only the frames, glass etc are recycled right now, not the cells themselves. That part is apparently coming.
So as of now, where do you think the cells end up?
The point is, science and resulting technology can be used to solve problems.
There are people who have problems for every solution; others see opportunity.
Bill Gates once said he did not think anyone would ever need more than 64K of memory.
Back in the 60's who ever thought we would have the ultra low emissions engines of today?
When I started in semiconductor manufacturing in the early 90's, 65 nm tech node was the norm. Simply amazing.
I understand Intel's new 7 nm 3D Nand chips act as a 3 nm trace. Good Lord...
Last edited:
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
![[Linked Image]](https://solartechonline.com/wp-content/uploads/chart-TOU-DR1.png "[Linked Image]")
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
In the US the term NetZero in the context of building science means that the structure essentially produces as much electricity as it consumes. In any case utilities are learning to manage the duck curve by upgrading their equipment, exploring utility scale storage, and converting existing capacity into fast responding NatGas peaker-plants. In the US at least the power companies actually prefer renewable such as Solar/Wind because it'll cost them less $$ to upgrade equipment to manage these additional sources of power rather than having to build out more generation capacity.
At the residential level daily demands for electricity will begin to level out as homeowners buy better built homes, replace equipment with something that's more efficient and possibly charge their EV's through the night. In the US the majority of building stock is incredibly leaky in terms of air infiltration so owners end up sucking lots of power during the AM and afternoon.
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/one-way-fix-duck-curve
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/big-batteries-not-new-power-plants
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/utility-proposes-new-approach-for-off-peak-rates
Now of course when it comes to pricing for power in the United States the entire pricing system is broken. By in large government protects power companies are protected from competition and approves their rates.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
In the US the term NetZero in the context of building science means that the structure essentially produces as much electricity as it consumes. In any case utilities are learning to manage the duck curve by upgrading their equipment, exploring utility scale storage, and converting existing capacity into fast responding NatGas peaker-plants. In the US at least the power companies actually prefer renewable such as Solar/Wind because it'll cost them less $$ to upgrade equipment to manage these additional sources of power rather than having to build out more generation capacity.
At the residential level daily demands for electricity will begin to level out as homeowners buy better built homes, replace equipment with something that's more efficient and possibly charge their EV's through the night. In the US the majority of building stock is incredibly leaky in terms of air infiltration so owners end up sucking lots of power during the AM and afternoon.
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/one-way-fix-duck-curve
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/big-batteries-not-new-power-plants
https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/utility-proposes-new-approach-for-off-peak-rates
Now of course when it comes to pricing for power in the United States the entire pricing system is broken. By in large government protects power companies are protected from competition and approves their rates.
Last edited:
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.
Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.
When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.
Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.
When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Well, we are slowly getting more of them on the Houston streets … and in the fringe areas where money has moved away from the inner city. So when I see a guy at a new Tesla charging station … and he's sitting there when I go in to get food (and still there talking on his phone when I come out) … what does he pay at lunchtime ?
How are the local charger prices established ?
How are the local charger prices established ?
Last edited:
Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.
Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.
When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.
Timer... Charge off-peak.
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.
Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.
When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.
Timer... Charge off-peak.
Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by millerbl00
Gasoline would go UP as demands goes down. It would not be profitable to sell it. Already seeing this in the hobby industry as electrics take over.
Maybe short term, but it wouldn't last...prices going up when demand drops just goes against every economic model...
It's not that. When the demand drops significantly, gasoline will be produced in much smaller quantities, which means manufacturers will lose economy of scale, which will translate into higher prices.
Originally Posted by millerbl00
Gasoline would go UP as demands goes down. It would not be profitable to sell it. Already seeing this in the hobby industry as electrics take over.
Maybe short term, but it wouldn't last...prices going up when demand drops just goes against every economic model...
It's not that. When the demand drops significantly, gasoline will be produced in much smaller quantities, which means manufacturers will lose economy of scale, which will translate into higher prices.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Tesla/GM JV targets the southern market
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
I feel like that electric infrastructure won't happen without nuclear power, which everyone is afraid of for some reason? I've always thought it was a super attractive clean power option. No CO2/NOx etc, ability to meet peak demand quickly, very stable power generation for decades. We're on nuke power where I live and I like knowing my power isn't producing emmisions and I won't have to worry about the unreliability of solar.
By scale there just isn't much waste produced, they keep all the spent rods at the plant still, and the system surrounding spent nuclear waste keeps it safe and secure. I like it, maybe I just don't know enough and that's why others don't want more nuclear. Seems like an easy solution to rising fossil fuel prices in the future.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
I feel like that electric infrastructure won't happen without nuclear power, which everyone is afraid of for some reason? I've always thought it was a super attractive clean power option. No CO2/NOx etc, ability to meet peak demand quickly, very stable power generation for decades. We're on nuke power where I live and I like knowing my power isn't producing emmisions and I won't have to worry about the unreliability of solar.
By scale there just isn't much waste produced, they keep all the spent rods at the plant still, and the system surrounding spent nuclear waste keeps it safe and secure. I like it, maybe I just don't know enough and that's why others don't want more nuclear. Seems like an easy solution to rising fossil fuel prices in the future.
Originally Posted by Ponchinizo
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
I feel like that electric infrastructure won't happen without nuclear power, which everyone is afraid of for some reason? I've always thought it was a super attractive clean power option. No CO2/NOx etc, ability to meet peak demand quickly, very stable power generation for decades. We're on nuke power where I live and I like knowing my power isn't producing emmisions and I won't have to worry about the unreliability of solar.
By scale there just isn't much waste produced, they keep all the spent rods at the plant still, and the system surrounding spent nuclear waste keeps it safe and secure. I like it, maybe I just don't know enough and that's why others don't want more nuclear. Seems like an easy solution to rising fossil fuel prices in the future.
Nuclear is ridiculously expensive and S-L-O-W to ramp up/down. In all seriousness w/out govt guarantees reactors would never get built.
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I'm not certain what you're trying to say.
California residential code essentially requires new homes to be net-zero and builders are going to reach that goal by adding solar. The panels are going to come with the house and at the moment appear to end up in the purchase price. Because they're part of the purchase price the cost will be amortized over 30 yrs by way of the mortgage loan.
It's really very simple, but EV/solar advocates like to make it sound like us power engineers don't understand what we are talking about.
Nett zero means that you produce during the day, over and above what the market requires...prices go down.
At night (I know that the sun shines on California and their laws 24/7, but humour me, you rely on someone actually MAKING it...prices go up.
That's where you get the duck curve, that's where you get the inverted peak/off peak for e.g. Hawaii is a sneak peak ...see what I mean ???
I'm sure that you cn grasp the concept of storage that you need to amortise the cost of the battery over each charge/discharge cycle...and that's around 25c/KWh, even if filled with free electricty.
So from a home owner's perspective, if you choose storage, to charge your EV, you are looking at VERY expensive electricity...if you need you need touse your car during the day, and charge at night, it will soon be the most expensive part of the day to do so.
If you need me to type slower, let me know.
I feel like that electric infrastructure won't happen without nuclear power, which everyone is afraid of for some reason? I've always thought it was a super attractive clean power option. No CO2/NOx etc, ability to meet peak demand quickly, very stable power generation for decades. We're on nuke power where I live and I like knowing my power isn't producing emmisions and I won't have to worry about the unreliability of solar.
By scale there just isn't much waste produced, they keep all the spent rods at the plant still, and the system surrounding spent nuclear waste keeps it safe and secure. I like it, maybe I just don't know enough and that's why others don't want more nuclear. Seems like an easy solution to rising fossil fuel prices in the future.
Nuclear is ridiculously expensive and S-L-O-W to ramp up/down. In all seriousness w/out govt guarantees reactors would never get built.
- Status
Similar threads
