Jan-02-2023 12:07 PM
Jan-11-2023 11:59 PM
map40 wrote:
There are a many reports in favor as there are against them. If what the reports against it say is true, why are all automakers going into it? NO AUTOMAKER WOULD GO INTO EVS IF THE REAL CASE WAS THAT BAD. Will it replace ICEs? NO WAY, THE TECHNOLOGY IN ITS CURRENT PATH CAN'T. When we learn to evaluate things objectively with no preconceptions or politics we will understand that EVs are just a variant type of vehicle that thanks to the advance of technology is now getting into the masker after 140 of being invented (remember, EVs are older than ICEs).
Jan-11-2023 11:51 PM
map40 wrote:
Without the complicated mechanics and the short range of a plug in hybrid (not a hybrid). Might sound similar, but it is a world of difference.
Always remember, an ICE is 30% efficient on converting fuel into motion. Parasitic loads, brakes converting kinetic energy into heat, they are all waste. An EV is 95% efficient converting power into motion.
As I said, they are a great alternative for the right use, but they won't replace all ICEs uses. And Trucks are the most difficult use for EV applications.
Jan-11-2023 05:05 PM
pianotuna wrote:
Reisender,
Unfortunately Saskatchewan is one of the 3. We are extremely dependant on coal--even though the mine near Estevan is supposed to close in 2024.
"About 81% of electricity in Saskatchewan is produced from fossil fuels
–approximately 40% from natural gas, 41% from coal, and a very small amount of petroleum in remote off-grid communities. The remaining 19% is produced from renewables, primarily hydroelectricity."
Jan-11-2023 05:02 PM
Michelle.S wrote:I would assume the grid will be prepared before the last is shut down.
BUT, what happens to the Grid when the remaining Coal Fired Plants are taken off line??
Remember burning Coal is bad just like gas and Diesel.
Jan-11-2023 04:58 PM
Jan-11-2023 04:47 PM
Michelle.S wrote:
BUT, what happens to the Grid when the remaining Coal Fired Plants are taken off line??
Remember burning Coal is bad just like gas and Diesel.
Jan-11-2023 04:38 PM
Jan-11-2023 04:37 PM
RoyJ wrote:Reisender wrote:
The BC hydro website digs into this a bit. Essentially the province doesn’t have a problem with generating capacity. But distribution and grid will adapt in the normal course of maintenance and up keep going forward to adapt to the changing load in neighborhoods etc.
Nailed it. Gen capacity is not (too much of) an issue in BC, especially once Site C comes online. We're at around 2,000 MW remaining capacity at peak usage, simplified math says 330,000 6kW home slow chargers. If charged overnight then virtually unlimited.
But we have a lot of neighborhoods still fed by single phase 12kV lines, and older substations are tapped out. Upgrading the entire province to 25kV will take a long time (took 5 years just to get rid of the last 3 4kV substations).
I fully support a 2-tier rate system with cheaper off-peak hours. However, if that means higher peak hour rates, then non-EV owners won't be happy.
Jan-11-2023 03:59 PM
Reisender wrote:
The BC hydro website digs into this a bit. Essentially the province doesn’t have a problem with generating capacity. But distribution and grid will adapt in the normal course of maintenance and up keep going forward to adapt to the changing load in neighborhoods etc.
Jan-11-2023 03:50 PM
way2roll wrote:look at my post on the Socratic method
Dude, I've seen your posts and respect you, but this is a pretty thin argument.
Jan-11-2023 03:29 PM
way2roll wrote:
Straw man argument. How is the logic faulty? So there isn't enough demand with an already over taxed power grid? Tell that to the folks told to charge their cars at night, not at all or experience rolling black outs. Upgrades come when subsidies kick in. Just like EV's.
Jan-11-2023 03:19 PM
way2roll wrote:This is just inaccurate. As I posted earlier, 6%-8% if EVs are adopted as rapidly as hoped and that's over a period of at least 20 years. Google for yourself if you like. These things just aren't the huge power sucks some folks like to imagine.
You don't think utilities will increase once demand goes up from EV's? And that cost amortized to those that don't own EV's? We are talking a huge ramp up in electric infrastructure. I mean, we're already paying musk billions with subsidies. Dude, I've seen your posts and respect you, but this is a pretty thin argument.
Jan-11-2023 02:23 PM
BCSnob wrote:
My questions are delivered in the spirit of the Socratic method, to get people to think about the ramifications of their arguments. Such as power generation must be built for future EV adoption before EV adoption should be allowed to occur.
Jan-11-2023 01:58 PM
BCSnob wrote:
Do people want utilities to increase generation capacity (passing these capital investment costs onto consumers) based upon the most aggressive predictions of EV adoption (putting the horse before the cart) or continue to build in capacity based upon changes in measured demand?
Jan-11-2023 01:54 PM