December 22, 2021 5:33 pm at 5:33 pm #2044084
Pres. Biden want 50% of the cars in the US to be electric by 2030., which is only eight years away.
The problems are the following:
1) The current cars have a range of 175 – 275 miles between recharging of their battaries. Recharging using house current will provide 2 miles per hour or take about 10 hours, while using a high pwer charger will take about an hour. Compare that to gas which will only take a few minutes.
Where will you find the time?
2) This may work well if you have a driveway where you can charge your car but what about those that don’t have a driveway.
3) This would require millions of charging stations, which will require generating million of KWH where is this electricity going to be generated from? Likewise new power lines are going to have to be strung. How is this going to be done in less then 8 years? The charging station that I walk by a rarely used.
4) What happens in a blackout? Even if you have solar panels it’s doubtful you generate enough to power your own home let alone power your car. People that want to help can’t because they will run out of charge. Right now they can carry extra gas in gas cans for the trip back which can’t be said of electricity.
5) This will also cause the price of gasoline to rise. As fewer people are buying gas inorder to make a profit the gas station will have to charge more per gallon due to the lost in volume of gallons that they previous sold.
6) What happens if you run out of fuel?
7) They may force the car manufactuers to stop making gas powered cars so that the only new cars will be electric.
These are just a few reasons why this is a bad idea.Why is this important? Because part of the Infrastructure Bill that has already passed, allocates $7,5 BILLION to build charging stations. Let’s stop it before our children and grandchildren have to pay for this boondoggle.December 22, 2021 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm #2044116
We, and our government, need some humility: they are not able to predict packed ports and that covid tests will be required before people travel, not a month after. At the same time, they are bravely spending their time and attention, and our money, on solving future problems.December 22, 2021 9:22 pm at 9:22 pm #2044130akupermaParticipant
If the Democrats stay in power it won’t be optional. If you aren’t rich enough to afford a car, you don’t get to drive (don’t worry, only deplorables will be unable to afford electric cars).
If electric cars were practical, the government wouldn’t be subsidizing them and mandating them. The auto companies would switch of their own free will.December 22, 2021 9:40 pm at 9:40 pm #2044139
Correction: Using 120 volt it will take 34-40 hours to recharge a 200 mile battery, using 240V to recharge it’s 10 hours or you get 20 mile per hour . Rapid charging can take as little as 30 minutes to an hour,December 22, 2021 9:42 pm at 9:42 pm #2044141GadolhadorahParticipant
“If electric cars were practical, the government wouldn’t be subsidizing them”
If corn, wheat, soybeans etc. were “Practical” why did the government spend nearly $38 billion in FY 2020 in crop subsidies
If oil and gas were “practical” why did the government subsidize oil and gas producers nearly $7 billion in FY 2020 through below-market royalties for drilling on federal lands and offshore
Same for nearly $4 billion in subsidies to electric utilities by assuming the risks of nuclear power that private insurers won’t provide
Since WW II the federal government has paid out several trillion dollars in subsidies to various sectors of the economy to achieve policy outcomes approved by Congress under both Democratic and Republican presidents. Electric vehicles as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions are one of those policies. Several major auto companies have already announced they are phasing out all gasoline powered vehicles and going 100 percent electric.December 22, 2021 10:39 pm at 10:39 pm #2044145charliehallParticipant
I have been pointing out (1), (2), and (3) in the OP for a long time in other forums. (1) is the reason we need millions of fast charging stations. (2) shows that EVs are largely the idea of well off white suburbanites with driveways. (3) however isn’t the big deal you think it is because peak electric power generation is late afternoons and there is lots of excess capacity at night when cars would be charged. However, if we are forced to switch to electric heat, as the NY City Council unfortunately is trying to do, that changes everything. (4) is not an issue because blackouts only occur about once every 20-25 years in places other than Texas. (5) is nonsense because the demand for gasoline will plummet and the price will crash. That’s economics 101. (6) is a problem for gasoline engine vehicles as well. (7) is nonsense; the automakers acted on their own to phase out gasoline engine vehicles. In fact there are huge potential advantages to electric vehicles; the century of experience with electric buses is that they require far less maintenance and last twice as long.December 23, 2021 7:02 am at 7:02 am #2044154
As far as Blackouts are concerned you need look no further than California not Texas, which has rolling blackouts due to peak demand and to combat forest fires due to poor planning.
The key problem is electricity unlike gas can not be stored and so there is the risk that it wouldn’t be there when you need it.
I am glad that someone agrees that NYC which wants to use electric for both heating and cooking will overload the system which may result in blackouts with no heat, only cold food and no transportation.December 23, 2021 7:02 am at 7:02 am #2044153LostsparkParticipant
Internal combustion cars go away, electricity prices rise….no benefit to the consumer long term. Mark my words.December 23, 2021 9:20 am at 9:20 am #2044183QuayboardwarriorParticipant
Your concerns are precisely the reason why EV manufacturers are turning their focus to faster charging rather than extended range.
If charging time can be brought down to 5min or less, EV stations can replace gas stations.December 23, 2021 11:21 am at 11:21 am #2044200akupermaParticipant
Gadolhatorah: Without subsidies (in the form of price supports, though government purchases of unneeded crops or paying farmers not to grow certain crops), prices would be much lower, meaning marginal (and inefficient) farmers would change occupations, and consumers would pay lower prices. Corporate welfare paid to producers of carbon-based fuels is probably a reason why electric vehicles had problems in the past.
While a strong argument can be made for the government paying money to the poor (the modern equivalent of tsadakah, though the government seems to cherish humiliating the poor and impairing their ability to rise out of poverty), various forms of subsidies are just welfare for the undeserving rich, which hurt the bulk of society. Better for the government to stay out of the economy, and let free markets decide what is most efficient.December 23, 2021 11:21 am at 11:21 am #2044207
charlie > because blackouts only occur about once every 20-25 years in places other than Texas.
that is not true. Powerlines outside of major cities are fragile. I once was in a very-electric house during a major wind event in the winter. There was no electricity, no internet, no stove, and no bathroom until the power was repaired. With the electric car, I would not be able to leave also.December 23, 2021 11:23 am at 11:23 am #2044212
Even if all of this makes sense, we need to know proportions and where to focus. Feds were not able to stockpile covid tests and will provide them in January for the December peak, they are still “discussing” whether to pass military hardware from Afghanistan to Ukraine, inflation is “temporary”, they are asking oil companies to increase production, despite their efforts to make this production lose money. In all of these cases, we see that the government lacks a foresight two months ahead, while they are solving future problems.December 23, 2021 11:23 am at 11:23 am #2044213
> turning their focus to faster charging rather than extended range.
This is simply a good slogan. Obviously, shorter range means faster charging. If you work from home, you can charge the whole day!December 23, 2021 11:23 am at 11:23 am #2044219
Some of the OPs arguments are based on incorrect facts.
– Currently, EVs have a marketed range of 358 miles, (source Tesla website, model 3).
– Increasing range per charge is not that difficult of a problem to overcome, its just that most people don’t need it.
– Tesla has marketed their upcoming Cybertruck at 500+ miles per charge and hinted at possibly 600+ miles capacity options. Hummer is marketing their upcoming SUVs at 350 miles per charge.
– Superchargers can get you 200 miles in 15 minutes. Hummer claims they will have the capabilities of rapid charging, adding 100 miles in just 10 minutes.
– Power outages, would affect gas stations, as it will affect EV charging stations. Either way, they can focus on solar coupled with battery pack storage.
EVs are here, there are fewer mechanics to break and fix than a combustion engine has. EVs also perform better and have been shown to be reliable.
Furthermore, technology constantly improves, especially if there are profits and competition. There are billions of dollars allocated for R&D, the current EV and charging capabilities by far exceed those of just a few years ago. Based on the rate of development it will only get better.
Its not the future, its the current.December 23, 2021 11:35 am at 11:35 am #2044241
“that is not true. Powerlines outside of major cities are fragile.”
Solution a. Solar panels with battery packs.
Solution b. Gas powered backup generator.December 23, 2021 11:35 am at 11:35 am #2044243
“Even if all of this makes sense, we need to know proportions and where to focus. ”
– Are you referring to the government? at this point, the innovation and acceleration of EVs including the EV charging network has largely been done by the private sector.
The rate of acceleration is remarkable and its only going to increase with presence of the large auto makers that have EVs a priority.December 23, 2021 12:55 pm at 12:55 pm #2044261
2cents What you fail to mention is that the Telsa model 3 which has the one longest range of electric cars in the US. Although EPA rated at 383 miles The Model S has a claimed rate of 412 miles while EPA gives only 405 miles between charges. These models aren’t cheap a Model S starts at $90K and tops off at $150K while amodel 3 starts at $39k – $50K.
The problem with the rapidcharging as it is that it kills the battery life as it overcharges the battery.While the battery has a built in mangement to control this overtime it wears down. The normal battery life is 300k – 500k miles. But after 100k miles they can start losing it’s ability to hold the charge so that you will have to charge more often. There have been cars with as few as 40k miles having fried batteries and while this maybe covered under the warranty as most cars warranty the batterry for 100k miles or 8 years if the batteriy fails to hold 60% of the charge. There are other factors which may void the warranty such as how you drive, recharge and the climate it is being driven in. Battery replacement cost about $16K but will vary based on location.
A Telsa owner who needed a battery replacement decided to blow up the car rather than pay the $22K to replace it. Which you can google if you think I am making this up.
Another problem is how will all these EV battaries get recycled?December 23, 2021 1:44 pm at 1:44 pm #2044302
“These models aren’t cheap a Model S starts at $90K and tops off at $150K while amodel 3 starts at $39k – $50K.”
– Model S is a luxury model, Model 3 base model is 38,690 which is that high. Cybertruck baseprice was said to be at 39k, very reasonable for that size vehicle.
Furthermore, these are the initial rollout cars, with additional competition and innovation prices will likely be even cheaper.
” But after 100k miles they can start losing it’s ability to hold the charge so that you will have to charge more often”
– Batteries can be replaced with an estimated cost of 3-7k. If all that needs to be replaced every 100k miles is the battery, that’s not expensive.
“A Telsa owner who needed a battery replacement decided to blow up the car rather than pay the $22K to replace it. Which you can google if you think I am making this up.”
– I am sure there are a lot of people that are not happy about any one thing, so finding a story online is not going to change much.
“Another problem is how will all these EV battaries get recycled?
– Below is from the Tesla website.
What happens to Tesla battery packs once they reach their end of life?
Unlike fossil fuels, which release harmful emissions into the atmosphere that are not recovered for reuse, materials in a Tesla lithium-ion battery are recoverable and recyclable. Battery materials are refined and put into a cell, and will still remain in the cell at the end of their life, when they can be recycled to recover its valuable materials for reuse over and over again.
Extending the life of a battery pack is a superior option to recycling for both environmental and business reasons. For those reasons, before decommissioning a consumer battery pack and sending it for recycling, Tesla does everything it can to extend the useful life of each battery pack. Any battery that is no longer meeting a customer’s needs can be serviced by Tesla at one of our service centers around the world. None of our scrapped lithium-ion batteries go to landfilling, and 100% are recycled.December 23, 2021 2:03 pm at 2:03 pm #2044304
When an invention came about, problems arrived which generated solutions. To solve a problem always look at the highest level of purpose. The bird which wanted to drink water placed pebbles into it, so the water should reach its mouth but the highest level of purpose was to drink water which if found elsewhere would have sufficed.December 23, 2021 5:05 pm at 5:05 pm #2044378
Reb E: I am not sure what you are trying to say? Birds have no need for electric cars they can’t afford them nor can they drive as they have no hands. Do you mean that electric cars serve no purpose beause we already have gas powered cars that provide that function better? Or are you saying that we have to get rid of birds becuase they are raising the sea level like global warming?December 23, 2021 5:10 pm at 5:10 pm #2044352
2cents Battery replacement cost while you claim it’s only $3-5K and I say it’s 16K. The battery is made of module and usually only one of three modules are failing so the manufacturer will credit back the dealerfor the good modules who will then credit back the owner. So instead of costing 16K it only costs $6k and the difference is probably labor charges and or parts.
As far as swapping out batteries Owners are already complaining to Tesla due to voltage imbalances on their replacement batteries which is a sign of battery failure. The question is also will an owner spend the $3-5K according to you every few years so that his mileage range remain close to 100% not covered under warranties Tesla’s warranty only kicks in when mileage goes below 75% during the first 8 years and mileage on the car is below 100k. You have to realize Model 3 starts at $39K and as soon as you drive it out of the dealership the value drops. Is it worth it after a few years to spend $5k on a car that may only be worth $27k?
Most of your information comes from the manufacture’s website which is like trusting a used car salesman theyare only trying to sell more cars. While I rely more on third parties such as the EPA for mileage, repair shops and disgruntled owners for replacements costs.
I am curious if electric cars can survive on the potholed streets of NYC. The battery is on the bottom of the car if it scraps the pavement it can total the battery. Axles have already been broken in some of these potholes.December 23, 2021 5:43 pm at 5:43 pm #2044422
Trying to replace gas fueled cars with electric cars is a dumb idea. Producing electricity does not produce less pollution that using gas as an energy choice. The focus of the government on EV cars all about corrupt, liberal politics and has nothing to do with “climate change”.
The smartest way to go about burning less fuel is making better hybrid cars. Hybrid cars use about 30-40% less gas than regular cars. I’d they can make it go up to 50-60% more mpg of gas than regular cars that would be a fantastic solution to “saving the environment”..December 23, 2021 7:36 pm at 7:36 pm #2044436
NJ is now banning disel trucks and want them to switch to electric. This is going to create a supply chain back up. Many of the truckers who pick up containers from the ports are selfemployed and can’t afford to buy new trucks. Less truckers picking up from NJ ports will create a backlog of container as happened in the West Coast.
These drivers will either register their trucks out of state or work out of state resulting in less income tax revenue for NJ.December 23, 2021 10:20 pm at 10:20 pm #2044472
Yes, they are in the near future. Things are not perfect when an invention is first revealed and the problems get solved afterwards.December 23, 2021 10:21 pm at 10:21 pm #2044448HaLeiViParticipant
I think that “getting” as opposed to “legislating” is the key. Trying to legislate your solutions into place, is like yanking a tangled item instead of checking where it got stuck.
This is the issue I find with most Progressives. It is the mentality that you can fix your problems by legislating them away.
I do think electric cars, or the option thereof, is great. A government can go a long way in popularizing it, incentivizing its development, assisting in the necessary infrastructure, and even fund certain aspects of it.
Lots of great ideas come with their hurdles that bad to be ironed out. The car is made up of many inventions, not just the engine cycle.
Fast charging is likely on the verge of big breakthroughs which can drastically change everything. Perhaps, battery swapping can be an option.
Gas prices will only shoot up once it becomes a specialty, and won’t be profitable.December 23, 2021 10:21 pm at 10:21 pm #2044456
Your post is full of complaints, it seems that you get your information from random internet sites. I had a Tesla and was very happy with the performance.
There are so many issues with combustion cars, however, because we are used to it, we accept it as is. I know many people that have many issues with their combustion cars, engine and transmission issues. EPA estimates that are far from accurate, etc.
It seems that for some, to accept EVs as the future, or as the current would require a paradigm shift. It has better performance, less mechanical issues, significantly more comfortable ride, one can keep it plugged in overnight and start their day with a full battery, no need to visit the gas station. It can be plugged in while one is at the shopping mall, and full up their battery all while they run their errands. There is so much more.December 23, 2021 10:22 pm at 10:22 pm #2044458
“Producing electricity does not produce less pollution that using gas as an energy choice.”
– Solar energy is free and clean.
“ The smartest way to go about burning less fuel is making better hybrid cars. Hybrid cars use about 30-40% less gas than regular cars”
– Hybrid is an old fad, car companies attempted to push it. However, people were not buying it. Unless you suggest forcing people to purchase Hybrid cars, allow the private sector to innovate and develop.
The idea of hybrids in the day and age of EVs is silly, essentially installing two a combustion engine and a battery when the current batteries are comparable in range to gas engines is an unnecessary cost.December 23, 2021 10:46 pm at 10:46 pm #2044486
Abba_S, according to your logic Hashem would have never created the human being as he is not perfect. See Midrash Rabeh, Bereishis (8,5).December 23, 2021 11:07 pm at 11:07 pm #2044490
2scents> Powerlines outside of major cities are fragile.”
Solution a. Solar panels with battery packs.
Solution b. Gas powered backup generator.
So, more money spent .. I have no problem with private companies trying to build something new and sell it. Still, most of it comes out of huge gov subsidies and lots of gov activities going to conferences, suppressing oil & gas, etc. President, especially this one, has that many hours he is awake. He spends this time on climate change and forgets to save our Afghani partners. Maybe if he would listen to a couple of more alternative intel briefs, he would save some people.
Even privately – instead of buying a Tesla, you could have hired a private tutor for your kids, or not worked that time and learnt.December 23, 2021 11:32 pm at 11:32 pm #2044502
2cents, percentagewise, very little electric is produced nowadays through solar energy. To create enough electric to power all cars on the road would they all be EV, you would need hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, of acres for solar farms. That means much of the Federal and State lands that are reserved for conservation and wildlife would be destroyed. How would that help the environment? Furthermore, the private sector does not have the ability to produce as many solar farms as would be needed to charge all EV vehicles that would be potentially be bought in the near future and this have to rely on the government for handouts. This EV business is all about Federal grant funding for private companies to supposedly “save the environment” , meanwhile it would ruin the environment and the US economy.
I totally agree with your second point. The private sector should innovate and develop with limited government intervention and no government handouts. And if that means further developing this “old technology” of hybrid cars, kol hakovod. I would personally choose a hybrid car that doesn’t need filters changed and the battery babied than an EV car. Perhaps in 10-20 years I would consider an EV car if there would be more charging stations and the car could charge in 5 minutes and give me the same mileage as gas powered car on a full tank. But purchase of an EV car should be my choice, not the government’s. If companies want to further develop EV vehicles and provide more charging stations, then also, kol hakovod to those companies and the consumers as well. The best economy is capitalism, free and mostly unfettered and ulittered with corruption from government handouts. The government should absolutely not force consumers to purchase EV vehicles or any other vehicle the politicians fancy they should push people into buying.December 24, 2021 12:21 am at 12:21 am #2044505charliehallParticipant
“The best economy is capitalism, free and mostly unfettered and ulittered with corruption from government handouts.”
Our entire street and highway system was built by the government. And the fossil fuel industry has benefited from huge subsidies for generations.December 24, 2021 1:21 am at 1:21 am #2044510
charliehall, yes, that’s what BASIC government taxes are for- for BASIC infrastructure. But for the CONSUMER we need capitalism. If the government wants to give out handouts to all or select sectors in the market because they favor one thing or another, it is an invitation for legalized corruption which ends up bankrupting the economy and placing immense taxes on those who cannot afford it; in other words, it’s communism. Communism has always made the masses poor and the select elites rich.December 24, 2021 1:23 am at 1:23 am #2044511
>> “The best economy is capitalism, free and mostly unfettered and ulittered with corruption from government handouts.”
> Our entire street and highway system was built by the government.
And we have government running the Navy also. There is no contradiction. Whatever is impossible to be done through market means, is done by the government. And, in US, should be done by appropriate government: your street should be built by the town and highway by the state.
The only reason we have so much enmity in federal, especially Presidential, elections, is the multitude of issues that the President is responsible for. Medicine, tax credits, building roads – all of these should be done by states, and everyone can choose a state to live in at minimal cost. Presidential debates should be limited to foreign affairs and defense budget. Boring.December 24, 2021 1:33 am at 1:33 am #2044519
As an illustration, how great government helps people – Jeff Bezos is donating $130 MLN dollars to help poor communities write GRANT APPLICATIONS so that they have a chance to receive money allocated by Congress in recent giveaways. They do not stand a chance of getting the money without the assistance. That is, in addition to millions of dollars we pay to support the gov employees, we now need $130 mln dollars to get that money back from them.December 24, 2021 3:17 am at 3:17 am #2044521
AAQ, yes that’s how it used to be. The Federal government used to be involved in defense and foreign affairs and very little in state affairs. But now the overreach from the Federal government is absolutely terrible, as is the overreach from many State governments, mostly liberal leaning states.
When I was a kid we knew who the president was but we never felt it affects us on a personal level. Now every day there’s another mandate or rule being enforced by the Federal government on the average citizen and the policies of the administration in power has a huge, immediate impact on every citizen. The intrusion of the government in our lives is absolutely against the constitution.
What you mentioned regarding Jeff Bezos is absolutely terrible. Besides that the Federal government should not steal trillions from taxpayers and future taxpayers to fund state projects, it just shows the corruption and mismanagement and hefkeiros from the government on all levels. And a big part of that is because as you say, the Federal government should not be involved in state affairs. And I also say that the State governments should not be involved in personal affairs of it’s citizens that they have no right to control. Basically it all boils down to the need control and the lust of power. This problem is as old as history, there are always humans seeking to control others for personal gain and power. Now, both, the Federal and State politicians in power want to control every citizen in matters that are not their concern.December 24, 2021 8:36 am at 8:36 am #2044524
What I am trying to say is government may think they are solving a problem but are really just creating other problems. For example, we have a homeless problem, so the solution is that most new apartment buildings must have a large number of Affordable Housing Apartments. Which sounds nice on paper or as a sound bite. The only problem is that in order to qualify fora studio apartments your income has to be over $69K and be able to pay $2,200 per month in rent. The problem is that the homeless can’t afford it. They make $30 to 50k per year. For another $100.00 per month in mortgage payments you could own a house and rent out the basement. Helping people own their own home would be the better way.
Over a hundred years ago instead of buses we had trolley cars, which were buses that run on overhead electric wires. We could go back to them. There would be no batteries needed. They could have rubber tires, so no tracks are needed. If electric is the way to go and most bus lines are owned by the government, why isn’t it being done?December 24, 2021 9:25 am at 9:25 am #2044537unomminParticipant
There isn’t enough energy generation for all of the planned electric vehicles. Anyone who tells you that there is, or that solar or wind can help, or mentions major battery storage under current technology, doesn’t understand anything at all about it. That’s the entire story.December 24, 2021 2:09 pm at 2:09 pm #2044544
What are your qualifications that should make us dismiss what others are saying?
On a micro level, can install a solar roof or solar pannels with battery packs, this would essentially mean charging your EV off of the sun.
On a macro level, solar panel farms can be created. Some businesses with large open roofs are doing it and selling the solar generated power to energy companies.
There will be those that will focus on problems and those that would focus on creating solutions.
But to remain on topic, all major car companies have designated billions in R&D money for EVs. Because Tesla has shown them that its the way to go.December 24, 2021 3:22 pm at 3:22 pm #2044582
uncommon, you are right about there not being enough electric energy for EV cars. But that is not the entire story. The story includes political corruption, lies, brainwashing and manipulation by the people in power.December 24, 2021 3:23 pm at 3:23 pm #2044588
Over 80% of the electric currently generated in the US is through coal, natural gas or nuclear energy. Hydro electric and wind provide another 15%. Solar only generates 2%. You need to double or triple the output, which can only be done by building more electric plants. Electricity loses power the futher it travels. Coal, natural gas and nuclear plants can be built anywhere. The problem is coal plants which account for 20% of the electricity are being phased out so any new plants are just replacing coal plants. These electric plants need to be spread out all over the country and many states don’t want them.
Another problem is the electric transmittion lines will have to be upgraded to able to take the heavy loads.
Can all this be done in less then 8 years? Doubt it.December 24, 2021 3:24 pm at 3:24 pm #2044591
Mrs. CTL and I leased an Electric Jaguar I-Pace to replace her Lincoln whose lease expired recently. When comparing costs it was similar to a new gas powered Lincoln of similar size and equipment/trim.
We have full solar in the CTL compound and sell excess to our local utility so it will cost nothing to charge. The mfg of rapid charge stations who is in the process of installing 4 at the CTL office building will also install a double unit at the compound at no cost.
Right now in CT there are state programs that make the cost of a rapid charge station free to the building owner,
Our town is considering changes to the zoning rules that will require every new commercial building to have as many rapid charge stations as required handicapped parking spaces.
All new residential (1-4 family) construction will be required to have one rapid charging station for each two units. Again, all at no cost to the owner.
We realized that we typically don’t drive more than 50 miles in a day, so range is not important to us.December 24, 2021 4:04 pm at 4:04 pm #2044612Yserbius123Participant
A. We need Congress to stop holding by that 1980s fear of nuclear power and build more nuclear power plants. They are cleaner to run and produce far more electricity than coal or oil. But since the big anti-nuclear campaigns of the last century (most of which are unfounded) caused the US to all but stop building and improving on them.
B. What’s the worst that can happen? Electric cars become cheaper? I would absolutely buy an electric car, presuming it can fit my needs and is a comparable price to a non-electric one. How often are you driving more than 300 miles a day anyway? Just a decade ago people were saying the same about hybrids and now look! Almost every car on the market (including vans) is a hybrid!December 24, 2021 4:05 pm at 4:05 pm #2044613
Ctl All new residential (1-4 family) construction will be required to have one rapid charging station for each two units. Again, all at no cost to the owner
Please clarify how it will be at no cost: town will provide land, equipment, and electricity? And Chinese will pay the taxes? And of course, poor people need to have affordable housing now, but we will do sun powered cars firstDecember 25, 2021 7:26 pm at 7:26 pm #2044707Johnny PicklesauceParticipant
it’s very important for the enviornment to use sun-powered cars. You know that studies have proved that if we don’t lower the usage of gas-powered vehicles in the next 100 years by at least %20, the outdoor air is bound to be unbreathable by 3050! We must start using electric powered cars today! #gogreen!December 25, 2021 7:43 pm at 7:43 pm #2044727
YS> fear of nuclear power
I agree. It would do the world a lot of good if people trying to achieve something propose reasonable measures that appeal to others at the top of their list. I may vote for reasonable subsidies to electric cars, coupled with new nuclear plants and favorable leases or pipelines for oil & gas to make us stronger now viz. our enemies. I would also support more money for public schools, if it were coupled with vouchers to charters/religious/online schools. Instead, we are getting push for expensive policies that only appeal to extreme people.December 25, 2021 9:38 pm at 9:38 pm #2044742
What I think CTL means is that he either gets a tax rebate either on his income tax or his real estate tax.There is no free lunch somebody is paying usually the tax payer. Which results in people saying the rich don’t pay their fair share. If these charging stations are paid with public funds they may have to be open to the public. Some of the public charging stations are in dealership’s parking lot and avalible even when they are closed. Creating security problems for both the driver and the dealership.
Do electric car drivers pay highway fuel tax or are they just freloaders ? Or is that going to be tacked onto everybody’s electric bill .
The reason they are giving rebates is because Ctl added a rapid chargers he improved his home allowing the state to increase his real estate tax permanently.The state makes their money back in a few years and the increase stays. The rapid chargers, 480 volts or higher will probably draw electricity from the electric company because it’s drawing the electricity too quickly which can short out the electrical system. Over a month he will have paid back any electricity used from the electric company as long as he hasn’t damaged the connection measuring electricity flowing into the electric company’s wires from his solar panels.December 25, 2021 10:01 pm at 10:01 pm #2044751GadolhadorahParticipant
Net metering tariffs, such as described by CTLawyer, are a great deal for those who are able to deploy rooftop solar in excess of their load and feed energy (MWH) back to the grid. However, its generally not a great deal for the local utility since in most cases, it must still have sufficient generating capacity (MW) to serve those same customers if/when their solar installations (and any linked storage) is unable to meet their load. In fact, California is scaling back its net metering tariff to reduce energy payments to solar customers. There are also cooperatives that aggregate community solar and are able to get credit for some discounted capacity value along with energy sales. Over the long term, as onsite battery storage become more efficient and economic, these problems will lessen considerably and utility capacity backup requirements for solar customers will come down.December 25, 2021 11:15 pm at 11:15 pm #2044770
I said it was a proposed zoning reg change in my town. Not statewide. The charging station is free to the property owner. Not land or cost of using it. The charging station is about the size of a parking meter pole and head. At our office they are installing them between two spaces on the dividing line at the concrete tire stop at the front of the space. There are cords for both spaces on one station.
They can be key operated, credit card operated, etc. we are using keys as only family will use them and I will provide the power. The state is paying for the stations through tax credits as it did for solar installations. Each landlord will decide how power is to be paid for.December 25, 2021 11:34 pm at 11:34 pm #2044774
There is no state property tax, it is municipal. The tax credit is assigned by the property owner to the company providing/installing the rapid charging station. This is the same system that got us our solar at no cost out of pocket.
Our local mall had had the public charging stations for a year or two. Car owners insert their credit or debit card to pay for a charge.
My solar system produces more than enough to sustain rapid charge, but in most cases we charge overnight at a slower rateDecember 25, 2021 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm #2044779jews4bidenParticipant
Point Number five is not anything the libs even will hear if u say it. Jen PPPPPsaki said that gas prices are so high b/c Biden is trying to move the economy away from automobiles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.