Tesla Launch of Pick-Up

Please posters, please be a little more understanding. ShinerBock is a wet blanket who sees a very dark cloud in every silver lining.

Sorry Bock, can't help myself again (the devil made me to it!).

ShinerBock wrote:

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:


Might as well, there are people who simply can't compete in high-knowledge high-tech California. And other states are attracting them with poverty-level wages for their low standard of level locations.

Wow, I have never seen that much arrogance, ignorance, and assumption all in one paragraph.

Oh yeah, do you want to agree against the current US demographic shift?

Suggested reading: Bloomberg (in an article today).

ShinerBock wrote:

NJRVer wrote:


Power companies should look into this.

https://www.ctcglobal.com/blog/importance-transmission-line-efficiency/

LOL, high voltage lines are not what I am talking about. It is the lines from the substations to the users. These high power lines deliver electricity from the power plant to substations and adequate in most areas. The lines from the substation to the user, however, are not in most areas.

Also, line efficiency has nothing to do with it. It is line carrying ability that is of a concern. A certain size line can only carry so much energy. More energy being transfered require bigger line.

LOL!
You obviously didn't read the article as "line carrying ability" is the point of the product they invented.

time2roll wrote:
Nobody is just going to connect a Megacharger to the local substation without a load calculation. Upgrade or limit power as needed.

Exactly! Which is why I said in the Semi thread that this has to be included in the cost of these trucks.

time2roll wrote:
The point is we are moving forward instead of declaring no more growth of anything because a few wires might get overloaded. Same as putting in a new tract of homes. Happens every day as a common and normal process.

The utilities themselves only welcome more EVs.

Yet again, you are putting your own thoughts and words into mine. I never said anything about no more growth or nothing of the sort. I am just stating that this is another one of the many processes that has to be done that will be harder than most think. Laying down NEW lines from a NEW or existing substation is a lot different then tearing out old lines(especially in a metro area) and replacing it with bigger line.

Then you also have the fact that these are all separate entities that cannot be controlled by Tesla. They may not have the want or funds for such projects for the foreseeable future.

time2roll wrote:
The utilities themselves only welcome more EVs.

You have any articles backing up that ALL utilities are welcoming more EV's?

Because the few articles I have read like the one one below state that most just barely started planning for them. These are hurtles that need to be recognized and dealt with. Tesla's semi will not be taken seriously by the medium/heavy duty industry until these questions are answered and promoting new products before they are answered only makes it worse.


Vast Majority of Utilities Just Beginning to Cope With EV Growth

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:


Might as well, there are people who simply can't compete in high-knowledge high-tech California. And other states are attracting them with poverty-level wages for their low standard of level locations.

Wow, I have never seen that much arrogance, ignorance, and assumption all in one paragraph.

time2roll wrote:
Nobody is just going to connect a Megacharger to the local substation without a load calculation. Upgrade or limit power as needed.

The point is we are moving forward instead of declaring no more growth of anything because a few wires might get overloaded. Same as putting in a new tract of homes. Happens every day as a common and normal process.

The utilities themselves only welcome more EVs.

Agree.

Built a few factories, one in rural TN, that's electricity and energy hog. We just gave the electric-distribution companies 2 year advanced notice and they are ready when we start needing the juice.

Never heard myself of progress or something not going through because of insufficient power infrastructure.

And in case of Tesla or Elon Musk, if he can power a city in 30 days in rural Australia, how much difficult do you think it will be to do it in any city or town in this 'ol US of A.

Nobody is just going to connect a Megacharger to the local substation without a load calculation. Upgrade or limit power as needed.

The point is we are moving forward instead of declaring no more growth of anything because a few wires might get overloaded. Same as putting in a new tract of homes. Happens every day as a common and normal process.

The utilities themselves only welcome more EVs.

ShinerBock wrote:

fj12ryder wrote:
This statistic from California Department of Finance:

NEW DEMOGRAPHIC REPORT SHOWS CALIFORNIA POPULATION NEARING 40 MILLION MARK WITH GROWTH OF 309,000 IN 2017

Last year’s 0.78 percent growth rate compares to the 0.86 percent annualized growth rate since the 2010 Census. Since 2010, when the state’s population was 37,253,956, population growth has averaged
333,000 a year.

Somebody's fudging the numbers it would seem. Like is attributed to Mark Twain: ...lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Again, that is coming from a higher than average birthrate and foreign(illegal) immigration. You see, people have what are called children and every child increases your population. When you have a higher birthrate of 2 or more, then you are adding more to your population than those that are dying. So you can't base an increase as population as more people arriving than leaving.

In regards to inter state migration, more people are leaving California than those arriving. That is a fact and has been so for years. So you saying that more or the same amount of people are arriving versus those that are leaving is just plain false.

Might as well, there are people who simply can't compete in high-knowledge high-tech California. And other states are attracting them with poverty-level wages for their low standard of level locations.

fj12ryder wrote:
This statistic from California Department of Finance:

NEW DEMOGRAPHIC REPORT SHOWS CALIFORNIA POPULATION NEARING 40 MILLION MARK WITH GROWTH OF 309,000 IN 2017

Last year’s 0.78 percent growth rate compares to the 0.86 percent annualized growth rate since the 2010 Census. Since 2010, when the state’s population was 37,253,956, population growth has averaged
333,000 a year.

Somebody's fudging the numbers it would seem. Like is attributed to Mark Twain: ...lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Again, that is coming from a higher than average birthrate and foreign(illegal) immigration. You see, people have what are called children and every child increases your population. When you have a higher birthrate of 2 or more, then you are adding more to your population than those that are dying. So you can't base an increase as population as more people arriving than leaving.

In regards to inter state migration, more people are leaving California than those arriving. That is a fact and has been so for years. So you saying that more or the same amount of people are arriving versus those that are leaving is just plain false.

NJRVer wrote:


Power companies should look into this.

https://www.ctcglobal.com/blog/importance-transmission-line-efficiency/

LOL, high voltage lines are not what I am talking about. It is the lines from the substations to the users. These high power lines deliver electricity from the power plant to substations and adequate in most areas. The lines from the substation to the user, however, are not in most areas.

Also, line efficiency has nothing to do with it. It is line carrying ability that is of a concern. A certain size line can only carry so much energy. More energy being transfered require bigger line.