400 mile electric RV

I wonder how many at Princeton have solar on their roof and drive an EV.....

Reisender wrote:

noteven wrote:
If you do the back of napkin calculation replacing gasoline use per day in the USA with electric vehicles generating capacity will have to almost double.

That doesn’t include diesel fuel for trucks, machines, and railways.

The power grid now is over 50% fossil fueled so that will need to be fixed as well.

Should be doable easy enough.

I don't know. BC Hydro started working on this back in 2015 and have different calculations than yours. We are an EV only household. Typically 16000 km per year. Our power bill is more affected by air conditioning use than EV use. Our typical commute use is under 8 KW per day which is probably typical for many, at least around here. We are also a non solar house. Those with solar around us pretty much generate all the power they need themselves on an annual basis including charging their cars, heating their homes etc.

Lots of variables. No simple answers but rather an aggregate of many.

Here is a pub BC hydro put out back in 2016. There is other interesting info on their website. Tons of new EV fast chargers in this province from about half a dozen principal players like BC Hydro, Tesla, Petro Canada, Shell, Electrify Canada, FLO etc etc. The grid will adapt and change as needed. Its a thirty year transition.

EV oponents dont realize or cant comprehend how eficient electric cars,motors are.
And how litle power it needs to recharge.
Low cost of driving is another plus.
Evs are here to stay and increase in numbers no doubt.

Electric Humvee conversion

https://youtu.be/hp1uI4D7NRQ

Timmo! wrote:
Which evil is more acceptable?

Oil spills or forest fires attributed to electrical powerlines?

Fyi
80% of forest fires are started by humans. The rest by lightning.

Powerlines are nowhere near as dangerous.

noteven wrote:
If you do the back of napkin calculation replacing gasoline use per day in the USA with electric vehicles generating capacity will have to almost double.

That doesn’t include diesel fuel for trucks, machines, and railways.

The power grid now is over 50% fossil fueled so that will need to be fixed as well.

Should be doable easy enough.

I don't know. BC Hydro started working on this back in 2015 and have different calculations than yours. We are an EV only household. Typically 16000 km per year. Our power bill is more affected by air conditioning use than EV use. Our typical commute use is under 8 KW per day which is probably typical for many, at least around here. We are also a non solar house. Those with solar around us pretty much generate all the power they need themselves on an annual basis including charging their cars, heating their homes etc.

Lots of variables. No simple answers but rather an aggregate of many.

Here is a pub BC hydro put out back in 2016. There is other interesting info on their website. Tons of new EV fast chargers in this province from about half a dozen principal players like BC Hydro, Tesla, Petro Canada, Shell, Electrify Canada, FLO etc etc. The grid will adapt and change as needed. Its a thirty year transition.

If you do the back of napkin calculation replacing gasoline use per day in the USA with electric vehicles generating capacity will have to almost double.

That doesn’t include diesel fuel for trucks, machines, and railways.

The power grid now is over 50% fossil fueled so that will need to be fixed as well.

Should be doable easy enough.

time2roll wrote:
Time will have the answer. I am ready to build.
Or do we wait until 2/3rds of the US looks like NM?

Homey,

Not a binary choice of "either or". Lots of correct answers between the two.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc17DqcA6Qc

Pull the lyrics...and you will read what I've believed for over 6 decades.

Homey,

Strategies of "hope" are destined to failure; not everyone will do the right thing, at the right time. Especially the government.

Time will have the answer. I am ready to build.
Or do we wait until 2/3rds of the US looks like NM?

Homey, about the birds....

There are over 67,000 wind turbines in the USA and about 43 million cats.

Guess what, you are right, more birds are killed by cats than wind turbines. But more condors, eagles, hawks, bats, and endangered birds are killed by turbines than by cats.

When we add 265 million acres of wind farms, what will the acceptable number of wind turbine caused bird deaths be?

BTW, aren't we seeing a decline in the population of birds and bees? That concerns me, how about you?

time2roll wrote:

Timmo! wrote:
If a forest fire is caused by electric transmission lines, then it is not an act of nature. PG&E has caused more fires than Carters has pills. The need for building more transmission lines will increase exponentially as BEV ownership increases. Ergo, more fires.

Windmills kill bird and requires a huge landmass (somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of USA) to provide the power this nation needs.

Solar has a similar problem, and would require about 25% of USA's land to provide the power needed.

But the power generated from current and alternative power still needs to go from here....to there. And its a fact, fires caused by electrical transmission result in more damage ($) than oil spills.

Distributed solar can reduce the need for transmission lines.

Cats kill more birds than windmills. Do we outlaw cats too?

Google says solar would need 10 million acres or 0.4% of land to provide ALL US electricity. Rooftop solar takes up zero extra space, zero extra transmission lines.

Homey, I wish your info was true....but the power density (kWh per square acre) varies between type and which professional you talk to.

Bloommberg News (not a big oil fan) produced a graphic report from Princeton University's research on land use required to achieve zero emission by 2050.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-energy-land-use-economy/

...and following are some of those graphics.

What the current energy mix looks like:



And it currently occupies about 4% of the continuous U.S. states (about equal to the size of Iowa and Missouri).


Now what is needed for 2050? The most land intensive quadruples the land need and....(drum roll please)...Wind Farms will require the size of Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma. Solar? Don't know, maybe an array on every rooftop?



....and for the smallest land footprint will require nukes (Homey, here's your 0.4%)



...and those transmission lines, what it looks like now



...and it will need to triple



Moral of the story: Google is not truthful. Google says 10 million acres of solar farms will do, Princeton says a mix of 17 million acres of solar farms PLUS 265 million acres of wind farms will be required. Hmmmm, I'll trust Princeton.

Can I get an AMEN?

On Edit: fixed link