EV alternative for light/medium duty trucks

[thomas201]

So much wheel spinning on EVs, what if they are not the right path forward? The biggest problem with renewable power and EVs is storage, the second is storage, and the third is storage. Another path is carbon capture from the atmosphere (using amine scrubbing like nuclear subs and carbon dioxide from natural gas) then splitting hydrogen from water, followed by building whatever hydrocarbon you need.

The US Navy is hard at work on this project, since it avoids storage of large amounts of jet fuel, and the difficult job of resupply of jet fuel at sea to the carriers. After all fire kills ships. The Fords were built with a very large excess electric generation capacity for this reason and many others.

Porsche now has a pilot project running in South America, Porsche syn fuel

This will work wherever you have cheap electricity and water. The products are put right into refinery feeds. No need to rebuild the approximately 1.5 Billion cars in the world. Solves storage, no worry about hydrogen embrittlement, recycles carbon dioxide, we use the existing liquid fuel distribution system. Transparent to the car/truck owner.

[Huntindog]

A few days ago the Wall Street Journal had an article about what it presently takes for renewables to supply power 24/7.
Apparently it has been done on a small scale in several locations. The common theme was that it takes 3 times the capacity of a conventional power plant AND an incredible amount of batteries to achieve the level of reliability we are used to. They flat out concluded that it cannot be done with todays technology.. It would take too much real estate and cost way too much.
So we are going headlong down a road that presently has a bad ending.
Will a better way be developed?..... Maybe and maybe not. One thing is certain. Companies will only continue down this road if makes financial sense. Presently Governments are providing enough incentives to make it so. But even they cannot afford to do this at the level it will take to be green. One thing is certain. Buisinesses will not shoulder the cost alone, as long as they know it is not the ultimate solution. As they would be loath to pay for all the stranded costs of a failed experiment IF a better way forward is found.

[map40]

Everybody keeps rolling politics and getting off the rails. Make peace with EVs, they won't be the final solution, but as they are 3 times more efficient than ICEs, they are here to stay for a group of the population until something cheaper/convenient comes along.
Very little so far into the trucks and towing as far as EVs because of the limits the technology has, but make no mistake, if a manufacturer makes a truck that can run on electricity and can be charged conveniently and cheaper than diesel IT WILL BE SOLD.
Today EVs used in commercial application is only ramping up on big fleets, like Amazon. You need big shoulder to afford the investment and reap the benefits. But they are not close to be used replacing trucks in most applications, which is the subject at hand.
EVs won't replace all ICEs application, not with the current technology, not with the current electric power capacity.

[map40]

Reisender wrote:

way2roll wrote:

pianotuna wrote:
Tax the fuel--which would encourage folks to charge at home, thereby lowering stress on the electrical grid.

How does charging at home lessen the stress on the power grid? You're still charging. Didn't CA ask folks not to charge their EV's during certain hours/days?

We had a cold snap here a few weeks ago and the power companies were doing rolling black outs to lessen stress on the grid and asking folks not to charge EV's.

I’m not an expert on this stuff but I have heard that grid managers prefer EV’s to charge after midnight and before 5 AM for balancing reasons, although I don’t actually know what that means. I know a BC hydro rep said they prefer night charging but they don’t incentivize it like some power companies. When we were with Southern California Edison it was definitely cheaper after midnight. Most DC fast charging is done during the day because of road trips. Most home charging is done at night because of commuting. We always set our timer for 1 AM. It’s usually done by 2 AM.

Differential rate or differential meters, that is the answer because it forces EVers to charge during off-peak hours. Several states have both, not only for EVs, but for pool heaters, air conditioners and several other types of equipment. EVs ORIGINALLY were designed in Japan to level-load the power consumption by using the ChaDeMo plug. Being a 2-way plug, you could feed power to the grid in peak ours and recharge during the off-peak. It was the largest socially-funded energy storage project ever conceived, and an amazing one at that.
California has diferential rater and shutdown lines with diferential meters in certains cities, so does Nevada. I have my cars programed to start charging ar 12:30AM, and they are done by 5. I have no restrictions in Florida, but at that time my ACs are working less.

[map40]

Grit dog wrote:
And back to the gubmint monitoring. Already in the world to have vehicles that will shut off if they think you’re drunk.
What you’re proposing is something that could literally be used to hand out traffic violations, virtually. Don’t threaten the govt with a good time!

And fwiw I would be all over a flat pay per mile based on avg fuel efficiency. Since I don’t own any vehicles that get very good and certainly not great fuel mileage. Win win for me.
But again it’s flawed.
Just tax the “fuel”. Let the EVers and EV mfgs pay for the infrastructure and technology to do it.

Your 3 post do nothing more than to show you misunderstanding of the technology, your lack of knowledge of the people who own EVs and your ignorance in the overall matter. EVs are available to everybody. Do you want to take advantage of it? Buy one. I have not seen yet a person that says "This is wrong, I want to pay more taxes".
I said it at least 15 times by now, MOST EV OWNERS ARE NOT GREEN PEACE ACTIVISTS. I don't have an EV to save the planet, I have it to save me money!.
If any of you ever took a tax deduction you have NO RIGHT to complain about EV owners, we are doing the same thing!

[Reisender]

way2roll wrote:

pianotuna wrote:
Tax the fuel--which would encourage folks to charge at home, thereby lowering stress on the electrical grid.

How does charging at home lessen the stress on the power grid? You're still charging. Didn't CA ask folks not to charge their EV's during certain hours/days?

We had a cold snap here a few weeks ago and the power companies were doing rolling black outs to lessen stress on the grid and asking folks not to charge EV's.

I’m not an expert on this stuff but I have heard that grid managers prefer EV’s to charge after midnight and before 5 AM for balancing reasons, although I don’t actually know what that means. I know a BC hydro rep said they prefer night charging but they don’t incentivize it like some power companies. When we were with Southern California Edison it was definitely cheaper after midnight. Most DC fast charging is done during the day because of road trips. Most home charging is done at night because of commuting. We always set our timer for 1 AM. It’s usually done by 2 AM.

[way2roll]

pianotuna wrote:
Tax the fuel--which would encourage folks to charge at home, thereby lowering stress on the electrical grid.

How does charging at home lessen the stress on the power grid? You're still charging. Didn't CA ask folks not to charge their EV's during certain hours/days?

We had a cold snap here a few weeks ago and the power companies were doing rolling black outs to lessen stress on the grid and asking folks not to charge EV's.

[ronharmless]

Like it or not, pay by the mile driven is coming down the road (figuratively speaking). Variables could include type of road, GVWR of vehicle, time of day, etc.
I would add that GPS data could easily be obtained and recorded to only track type of road, jurisdiction of road and miles driven on said road. But regardless, if you have a cell phone you can already be tracked; case in point: J6 defendants.

[pianotuna]

Tax the fuel--which would encourage folks to charge at home, thereby lowering stress on the electrical grid.

[Grit_dog]

And back to the gubmint monitoring. Already in the world to have vehicles that will shut off if they think you’re drunk.
What you’re proposing is something that could literally be used to hand out traffic violations, virtually. Don’t threaten the govt with a good time!

And fwiw I would be all over a flat pay per mile based on avg fuel efficiency. Since I don’t own any vehicles that get very good and certainly not great fuel mileage. Win win for me.
But again it’s flawed.
Just tax the “fuel”. Let the EVers and EV mfgs pay for the infrastructure and technology to do it.

[Grit_dog]

So we have a system that works perfectly from a pay per quantity used and pay per where you’re driving standpoint. One could say it’s a system that is on cruise control and requires no modifications if not for the pesky EVs paying their share. So why not concentrate efforts just on the EVs?
Well for one, the consumer subsidies and all the feel good nut rubbers giving each other reacharounds about how they’re saving the environment would have to cease, immediately.
But based on your suggested approaches that had little actual real world validity, an obvious choice would seem to be to tax consumer electricity rates higher and those that use more charging their cars pay more.
That nullifys the “feel good” free charging stations but if done soon, is easy since that is a very small part of installations. And I’m sure they could be modified to pay stations just like the commercial charging ports pretty easy.

But then those who have ICE powered vehicles still are being overtaxed, which is still the vast majority of vehicles…..
One thing we all agree on is it’s a connundrum that doesn’t seem to have an apparent easy singular fair solution.
Except maybe one. And it’s already started but it’s so watered down that it’s not actually viable. And that is an EV tax based on the size, expected lifetime power consumption of the vehicle.
But even that has its issues. Aside from making EVs even more prohibitively expensive to purchase new even if by the “rich folk” saving the world, resale will now have a lump increase which is harder to swallow the further you get down the personal income ladder.

So maybe JUST EVers could get the gps monitors and pay as you go with the home setups.

But that won’t happen. At least not in the near future. As if those folks ended up paying their fair share for “road use” it would make them less attractive to operate.

[Grit_dog]

Got a little long winded there to no avail scooby….so I’ll help you out.
Less than 1/3 of states have any sort of passenger vehicle inspections. Less than 1/5 of states have statewide emissions testing (another potential spot to nab mileages) and some of them are the same states as those w/inspections. So for that method, over 2/3 of states would have to reinstate or develop another state funded program.
Record mileage at registration intervals? Ok, except that’s not already a thing and there are countless vehicles that are odometer exempt.
So that leaves either a tracking device required for every vehicle on the road or an honor system. Lol at the cost complexity and personal privacy invasion of the former and double lol at the latter option.
Now let’s talk about what the per mile rate would be? Will it be calculated individually for each different individual vehicle? Or will those with fuel efficient vehicles be overcharged like those that don’t that don’t drive a lot in your scenarios.
And all this and have only touched on in state passenger vehicles.
Now add the complexity of interstate travel. Instantly it takes the states out of the equation and makes it something that can only be federally administered…which aside from its own pitfalls of the feds botching the solution even worse and at more cost than individual states, many states would need significant administrative changes to their entire tax structure.

And haven’t even touched on commercial vehicles or all kinds….
Besides, I thought ICE powered vehicles were going the way of the dodo bird?? Are they not?
Why revamp a large governmental program for something that is going to yield little ROI? I mean the govt does that c rap all the time but no need to create another black hole to throw tax payer dollars into…

[map40]

RambleOnNW wrote:
SoCalGas and Ford are collaborating on a hydrogen fuel cell Ford F550 Super Duty pickup.

https://newsroom.socalgas.com/stories/socalgas-to-test-drive-fords-prototype-f-550-super-duty-hydrog...

“The project represents a unique opportunity to decarbonize large fleets like utilities that require long ranges, fast refueling, onboard power needs, and 24/7 emergency response. “

DOE has narrowed down hydrogen hub production candidates to 33:

https://www.energy.gov/oced/regional-clean-hydrogen-hubs-notifications

For heavy load applications Hydrogen is a much better answer than EVs. I made 2 hydrogen vehicles (combustion based, not power-cell based) and they worked great.
A few months ago it was finished testing the first hydrogen extraction equipment direct from sea water, which would make hydrogen production far less expensinve to produce.
The problem with Hydrogen right now is storage and distribution, we don't have the infrastructure built for that.

[JRscooby]

Grit dog wrote:

JRscooby wrote:


One reason given for fuel tax revenues not keeping up with road building/maintenance is better MPG means more miles driven per dollar of tax collected. 1 fair and easy way to fix this problem would be zero out the per gallon tax, replace with per mile tax.

Stands to reason you’d be in favor of more government oversight and personal tracking…
WA is talking aboot this. It’s another ridiculous logistical and human rights cluster fark.

Not unlike the WA state bill to eliminate credit rating from insurance premium calculations. So egregious that even a liberal Supreme Court judge issued a stay of implementation on it.

Well, how many threads about the condition of highways we want to use while enjoying our RVs. Should they raise the fuel tax so only fuel burners pay for the roads? But a per year tax on the alternative fuel vehicles? That would mean people that don't drive much pay a higher rate than people that drive a lot. Probably the best idea would be put the highway system under control of DOD. That department always has unlimited funds.
Fact is, the only way to have a functioning road system is public finance.
Points on the tracking. Because some members on this site live across the borders, congress/courts have granted security departments right to monitor us. Plus most of use use loyalty cards, stores know when/what we buy. Credit Card companies track all we buy, including when/where we buy fuel*. Cell phone must track our location to know when to hand off signal.
Then most states require some kind of inspection when ownership of car transfers, and at regular intervals in the life of it. I bet part of the report is mileage. Just like 1099 workers are expected to report their income, pay the tax on that income every quarter, a car owner could report miles driven. Then when next inspection due, state compare odometer readings. If owner has not reported/paid tax on all miles, no license plates, permission to use our roads, will be granted. Maybe I not paranoid enough to see where state is getting any more info than do now.
*That CC info collected at pump can give a much more detailed description of when and where you go than any self report of the miles driven in 3 months

[RambleOnNW]

SoCalGas and Ford are collaborating on a hydrogen fuel cell Ford F550 Super Duty pickup.

https://newsroom.socalgas.com/stories/socalgas-to-test-drive-fords-prototype-f-550-super-duty-hydrog...

“The project represents a unique opportunity to decarbonize large fleets like utilities that require long ranges, fast refueling, onboard power needs, and 24/7 emergency response. “

DOE has narrowed down hydrogen hub production candidates to 33:

https://www.energy.gov/oced/regional-clean-hydrogen-hubs-notifications

[Grit_dog]

JRscooby wrote:

SterlingHayden wrote:


So you actually believe when enough EVs replace ICE vehicles for it to show up on the revenue balance sheets in brackets, they're not going to be sticking their hands in the EV owners pockets to make it back up? Come on man. Where are they going to get those funds?

One reason given for fuel tax revenues not keeping up with road building/maintenance is better MPG means more miles driven per dollar of tax collected. 1 fair and easy way to fix this problem would be zero out the per gallon tax, replace with per mile tax.

Stands to reason you’d be in favor of more government oversight and personal tracking…
WA is talking aboot this. It’s another ridiculous logistical and human rights cluster fark.

Not unlike the WA state bill to eliminate credit rating from insurance premium calculations. So egregious that even a liberal Supreme Court judge issued a stay of implementation on it.