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.

[way2roll]

BCSnob wrote:

shelbyfv wrote:

BCSnob wrote:
In other words “the cart before the horse” (in terms of power generation) is a false argument against adoption of EVs because increasing power generation requires there be incentives for the power companies.

I don't have a clue what all this means. :h

One argument posted here against the adoption of EV: the grid doesn’t have the power generation capacity needed for charging EVs. Adoption of EVs is putting “the cart before the horse”.

The faulty logic in this argument is power generation capacity won’t be increased until the demand for power increases by the adoption of EVs. Why would companies pay for a large increase in power generation unless they see there will be a return on investment?

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.

[pianotuna]

BCSnob,

Think of EV growth as you would a graph of Covid.

Ontario Hydro has transmission woes in Sudbury. Many homes have small 2 stroke generators and are using suicide cords during the frequent outages. In some cases when the power is off there is so much back feeding going on that an incandescent light will glow faintly.

I'm also reminded of some directions I got while tuning pianos in rural Saskatchewan. "turn right at the power line road". Only one small problem, the power line had been buried many years before.

[pianotuna]

Reisender wrote:


Yah for sure. Different areas have different challenges. But BC hydro is fairly indicative of most of Canada. Hydro Quebec has similar info on their website etc.

It’s a slow transition. I’m sure the various utilities will figure it out. Those that don’t will look like 3rd world entities. I’m sure they’ll want to avoid that. :).

And Saskatchewan is the total antitheses with little hydro generation. Fossils rule the roost.

[BCSnob]

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?

[ronharmless]

Reisender wrote:
…I’m sure the various utilities will figure it out. Those that don’t will look like 3rd world entities. I’m sure they’ll want to avoid that….

No problem fixing it, all you need is a bunch of dollar bills with 12 zero on them. Hence, rolling blackouts.

[shelbyfv]

^^^ Ahhh I guess the good news is that EVs are predicted to require only a small increase!

[BCSnob]

shelbyfv wrote:

BCSnob wrote:
In other words “the cart before the horse” (in terms of power generation) is a false argument against adoption of EVs because increasing power generation requires there be incentives for the power companies.

I don't have a clue what all this means. :h

One argument posted here against the adoption of EV: the grid doesn’t have the power generation capacity needed for charging EVs. Adoption of EVs is putting “the cart before the horse”.

The faulty logic in this argument is power generation capacity won’t be increased until the demand for power increases by the adoption of EVs. Why would companies pay for a large increase in power generation unless they see there will be a return on investment?

[Reisender]

ronharmless 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. They don’t see any issues going forward. I realize that this is not the case everywhere...

Only a comparative minuscule number of people get their power from BC Hydro. The vast majority of us have a far different reality - reality being the grid already won’t handle it and getting worse by the day. What BC Hydro says is comparatively a knat on the wall to the rest of us.
Clicky

Yah for sure. Different areas have different challenges. But BC hydro is fairly indicative of most of Canada. Hydro Quebec has similar info on their website etc.

It’s a slow transition. I’m sure the various utilities will figure it out. Those that don’t will look like 3rd world entities. I’m sure they’ll want to avoid that. :).

[ronharmless]

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. They don’t see any issues going forward. I realize that this is not the case everywhere...

Only a comparative minuscule number of people get their power from BC Hydro. The vast majority of us have a far different reality - reality being the grid already won’t handle it and getting worse by the day. What BC Hydro says is comparatively a knat on the wall to the rest of us.
Clicky

[Reisender]

stsmark wrote:
I think you just need to look at Tesla themselves. In 2018 Elon stated that GF Reno would be off grid in 2019. They have only added several sections of panels to the roof not nearly what would be required. I believe it would be startling to see the area of panels and number of Megapacks to make it work. He has also built 3 factories since with minimal renewable power capacity. There has to be a reason other than cost as they make all the equipment.
Also in terms of costs to Corporations let’s not forget that they have the Investment Tax Credit to cover facility upgrades for energy efficiency. As far as equipment ie Pepsi and the Semi’s they were eligible for 100% bonus depreciation last year, this year is 80%.

Rumour has it on TMC is that when the power company that serves that area found out that they were going to install all that solar they made them a smoking long term power deal and it made no sense to do the solar.

I believe they just recently finished their roof install but won’t be adding the next phase (whatever that is).

Just rumour but you can find it mentioned a few times on various sources including TMC. Who knows.

[stsmark]

I think you just need to look at Tesla themselves. In 2018 Elon stated that GF Reno would be off grid in 2019. They have only added several sections of panels to the roof not nearly what would be required. I believe it would be startling to see the area of panels and number of Megapacks to make it work. He has also built 3 factories since with minimal renewable power capacity. There has to be a reason other than cost as they make all the equipment.
Also in terms of costs to Corporations let’s not forget that they have the Investment Tax Credit to cover facility upgrades for energy efficiency. As far as equipment ie Pepsi and the Semi’s they were eligible for 100% bonus depreciation last year, this year is 80%.

[Lantley]

The cart before the horse debate is just silly.
Imagine if we applied that thought when the ICE engine was introduced.
Imagine idea that we have a flawless EV (just imagine I know its not actuually flawless) But to think we are not capable of expanding the grid is short sighted.

[Reisender]

shelbyfv wrote:

BCSnob wrote:
In other words “the cart before the horse” (in terms of power generation) is a false argument against adoption of EVs because increasing power generation requires there be incentives for the power companies.

I don't have a clue what all this means. :h

I kinda do. Power companies tend to be reactive instead of preemptive. Or at least some.

I think the other thing to consider is the difference between generating capacity and grid or distribution capacity. 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. They don’t see any issues going forward. I realize that this is not the case everywhere.

It’s interesting that they have submitted a new rate plan to the utilities folks that encourages night time charging. No ideas on the numbers yet but apparently we’ll find out in June.

Cheers.

[shelbyfv]

BCSnob wrote:
In other words “the cart before the horse” (in terms of power generation) is a false argument against adoption of EVs because increasing power generation requires there be incentives for the power companies.

I don't have a clue what all this means. :h

[BCSnob]

In other words “the cart before the horse” (in terms of power generation) is a false argument against adoption of EVs because increasing power generation requires there be incentives for the power companies.