Bent crude tops 60 a barrel

Whatever you do don't drink a cup of "Death Wish" coffee while reading this stuff. And that ain't no joke. Death Wish coffee actually exists. Amazon it. A couple of cups while reading this may induce thoughts of suicide.

I blame much societal ignorance on public educators. They stand up and drone like a noisy fan forcing the class into a near rigamortis stupor. Result? Cash registers with symbols rather than numbers on the keys.

Does a high school class titled TROUBLESHOOTING exist? I'll tell you why not. It would be like a 286 model computer evolving an 8-core 4 GHz processor. Kids are immersed in Cattle Pen education with no options. 55 years ago I had to cut English Literature to go to the library and learn something. I got caught by the Boy's Dean, red handed with a metallurgy book in my hands. I was risking my grade point average. Mr. Sullivan, the English literature teacher gave me A's both semesters. I suspected a conspiracy. I cannot quote A Mid Summer Night's Eve. Pity...

Teach math using REAL LIFE EXAMPLES.

Ralph Cramden wrote:

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:


Any more "green" stuffed down my throat and I'd be on Thorazine T.I.D.

LOL

Thorazine, used a lot with unruly horses.

Horses eat grass.

Grass is green, except in CA.Grass is green, except in CA.

After reading through this entire thread again I could use some also. I am willing to split a dose with ya, it's strong stuff.

In Kalifornia it's burnt......lol

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:


Any more "green" stuffed down my throat and I'd be on Thorazine T.I.D.

LOL

Thorazine, used a lot with unruly horses.

Horses eat grass.

Grass is green, except in CA.

After reading through this entire thread again I could use some also. I am willing to split a dose with ya, it's strong stuff.

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:
For years I was stressed to drive 500 miles down here twice per month. With headlights and air conditioner roaring. What is not being addressed is multiple car families. And those 500 mile per day getting there vacations. Oh well, I won't be around so that settles -that-.

A huge win for the environment would be a California mandate - prohibit bumper to bumper traffic. Double deck, triple deck urban freeways. A triple decker would allow smooth traffic flow.

But someone please tell me how Mr Moonbeam thinks higher taxes are green? If you have ever visited a California State office in Sacramento on a 110F day you'll find the interior at 68F with secretaries running heaters under their desk to keep their legs warm. I ran away and joined the circus when I became disabled.

Any more "green" stuffed down my throat and I'd be on Thorazine T.I.D.

Bay Area Rapid Transit trains haul 500% more commuters than they were designed for. They are using a 1960's computer. If they would double deck or triple deck parking lots, they could safely add another 500% rider capacity more like 10 times more. Do they contemplate it? No. Why? Because it isn't new wave thinking that generates taxes for carbon credits.

THE PROBLEM and it's the only one in California is a pervasive WE VERSUS THEM attitude by government.

Totally agreed, our ‘perceived problems’ (mostly politically driven via faux straw argument constructs...) are majority man made - though rational, workable options REALLY DO exist (may critical thinking RIP!!), the pleb Lunatics are fully in charge of the asylum... The Dept of Energy has spent well over 4 Trillion dollars from its inception yet has failed to produce 1 single barrel of oil or 1 cu/ft of nat gas, or the beginnings of a rational long term national energy policy...

For years I was stressed to drive 500 miles down here twice per month. With headlights and air conditioner roaring. What is not being addressed is multiple car families. And those 500 mile per day getting there vacations. Oh well, I won't be around so that settles -that-.

A huge win for the environment would be a California mandate - prohibit bumper to bumper traffic. Double deck, triple deck urban freeways. A triple decker would allow smooth traffic flow.

But someone please tell me how Mr Moonbeam thinks higher taxes are green? If you have ever visited a California State office in Sacramento on a 110F day you'll find the interior at 68F with secretaries running heaters under their desk to keep their legs warm. I ran away and joined the circus when I became disabled.

Any more "green" stuffed down my throat and I'd be on Thorazine T.I.D.

Bay Area Rapid Transit trains haul 500% more commuters than they were designed for. They are using a 1960's computer. If they would double deck or triple deck parking lots, they could safely add another 500% rider capacity more like 10 times more. Do they contemplate it? No. Why? Because it isn't new wave thinking that generates taxes for carbon credits.

THE PROBLEM and it's the only one in California is a pervasive WE VERSUS THEM attitude by government.

time2roll wrote:
You had your dream, I had mine.

Why do you need to stomp all over mine with your unsubstantiated claims?
We don't know the future. But I like mine better.

Sorry, my point was definitely not meant to deflate a dream - dreams often do come true (think of the lunar landing!) nor do I profess to know the future...My point was merely to look objectively at the present day problems we jointly encounter while considering public transportation and comprehensive national energy policy...

My view is that a most rational viable long term policy available today would be centered around the massively large quanities of clean burning natural gas that independent fracking technology's have made possible - in fact, much (but not all) of the distribution systems are already in place and operable, and cost are competitive, while greatly reducing pollution - this would also take a load off of the already over tasked electrical grid as well and heavy diesel trucks are readily convertible...Overall, a BIG win for the environment....The obstacles tend to be more peer-paradigm political in nature than practical...

Hold close your Dreams, we’re all in this together...

You had your dream, I had mine.

Why do you need to stomp all over mine with your unsubstantiated claims?
We don't know the future. But I like mine better.

time2roll wrote:
I have had that dream...

“A world mostly full of EVs because the low cost to operate and so fun to drive”

Sorry, neither are rational reasons to formulate serious public policy - ‘fun to drive’ is purely subjective, low cost (as with healthcare) is merely a forward looking claim, a meritless slogan lacking any actual empirical evidence...

“I imagined a world powered by solar with an abundance of low cost power during the day and mostly battery powered or nuclear overnight even if a bit more expensive.”

This added mentioned expense negates the purported ‘low cost’ statement from above - however, this also assumes that historically fuzzy public policy makers would even consent to increased nuclear power, even though its the most rational choice...Realistically (except for off-grid) the possibility of storing sufficient harvested daytime solar via residential battery banks is at present not cost effective or even practical in wholesale quanities with present battery technology - though a technology breakthru might ultimately be possible and change this...

“Imagine the vehicles will charge during peak solar hours at home or work. 40 amps max required for daily top-off.”

Where do the ‘at work’ employers obtain their power from??...Fact is no matter how you shuffle it, the common weakness remains with the incapable grid distribution and power generation system which was never designed for such a tasking.... 40 amp max would be strictly under the most ideal of scenarios (and without contingencies), as was ‘if you like your health care plan, you can keep it’....Planners would be held malfeasant to rely on any such low ball numbers...

“Imagine most homes also have some solar and battery storage. This reduces the grid connection needed to only 50 to 80 amps instead of 100 to 200 amps.”

Yet to be realised in sny significant or sufficient quantities, most all of on grid homes lack these expensive battery banks, thus highly subject to inclement weather...

“Imagine this starts to allow higher living density on the existing grid. Also increasing grid reliability and some independence during an emergency.

Imagine during inclement weather when the lines are down most neighborhoods would disconnect from the main grid and for a few days automatically have their own local grid prioritized for those with medical or other special needs.

And the dream is not yet complete. There will be more advantages and improvements not even contemplated yet.”

In my view (though not saying its impossible), with the existing design embedded troubled grid systems, low solar efficiencies, variable weather, present battery bank economics, and a unlikely potential shift towards nuclear power, I think though worthy, it is appropriate at this time to designate this as a dream ...

Yet after all this, if reducing emissions is still the primary goal, we’ve not been provided any empirical evidence that EV’s actually reduce ‘net’ emissions except for NIMBY (the ‘not in my back yard’ syndrome)...This in and of itself seems an obvious massive breach in rational policy making...

3 tons

Time2Roll

My comments were added to the above

3 tons wrote:
‘I Had a Dream’:

Imagine a world full of EV’s (possibly due to a political mandate??)...

Imagine a world where most EV owners recharge their vehicles starting mostly in the evenings...

Now imagine a world of private residences fitted primarily with the ever ubiquitous 100amp electric service panel...

Now imagine a world full of private residences potentially in need of larger electrical service panels...

Now imagine (in addition to other household needs including HVAC) a neighborhood near full of EV’s recharging simultaneously each evening at about 60 amps per vehicle residence...

Now imagine a current electrical distribution utility grid incapable of meeting this sudden electrical demand, while residential solar panel systems are past operating at their peak harvest time and with the possibility of inclement weather, and the unpopularity of hydro electric dams...

Imagine the efficiencies and effectiveness of pollution controls technology on existing non natural gas fired (and other HC fueled) electrical generation power plants...

Imagine the loss of efficency (and parasitical pollution) via the conversion process when utilities convert from NG (or any other HC resource) electricity, which is later (with any luck...) converted again into usable EV power...

Imagine a world where a politically neutral scientific body evaluates then compares the ‘net amount’ of real world pollution (considering grid source) of an EV to almost any modern day gasoline or natural gas powered vehicle (crickets....).... BTW, Both emit CO2, (though EV’s are a bit more virtuous)...

Imagine our public policy makers making energy and transportation policy based on reality and empirical data rather than impulsively defaulting to a popularly guided consensus....

‘I Had a Dream’

3 tons

Good evening 3 tons.

A couple observations, many people who own an EV don't even bother buying a 240 volt charger. They just use the 12 amp 120 volt EVSE that plugs into a 15 amp circuit. They usually do this 2 or three times a week when they have a 30 KWH ish battery. Bigger batteries like the Bolt, New Leaf or the TESLA can take a few days this way if they are empty but standard commuting is again an overnight situation and usually a couple or three times per week. Those of us with 240 volt units can only charge at a maximum of 32 amps depending on the EV. (Our leaf is 27 amps) ...and again usually a couple or three times per week. Tesla HPWC's can utilize a 50 amp circuit, but again, most with bigger batteries only charge once or twice a week. If you are doing a big road trip than you use superchargers or fast chargers. Every household plugging in two vehicles every night at 60 amps each is not a realistic sceenario.

If you want realistic scenarios of what it is like to live with an EV in real world situations, please feel free to ask us. I am certainly not an expert in any of this but I am happy to share my experiences which are probably typical of most EV owners.

Here is a picture of our two EVSE's. The one on the left is a 120 volt 12 amp unit and the one on the right is a 240 volt unit. It could theoretically pull 40 amps but with our car (and many others) it only pulls 27 amps, usually for about three hours, and usually about 3 times per week. If you look closely it is actually plugged into an RV 14-50 receptacle. We don't use the 120 very much since we got the 240 volt unit but if we don't want to run a cable under the garage door it still works fine. Just takes 6 times as long. :)

I have had that dream...

A world mostly full of EVs because the low cost to operate and so fun to drive.

I imagined a world powered by solar with an abundance of low cost power during the day and mostly battery powered or nuclear overnight even if a bit more expensive.

Imagine the vehicles will charge during peak solar hours at home or work. 40 amps max required for daily top-off.

Imagine most homes also have some solar and battery storage. This reduces the grid connection needed to only 50 to 80 amps instead of 100 to 200 amps.

Imagine this starts to allow higher living density on the existing grid. Also increasing grid reliability and some independence during an emergency.

Imagine during inclement weather when the lines are down most neighborhoods would disconnect from the main grid and for a few days automatically have their own local grid prioritized for those with medical or other special needs.

And the dream is not yet complete. There will be more advantages and improvements not even contemplated yet.

Time2Roll