More on the EV boondoggle

[dogmush]

Would that not suggest some specialized design? Again, I'm not up on the tech, but I thought there were several different charger types out there, and certain cars can't use the ones others can. Wouldn't that mean that each non-proprietary station would have to have several plug types?

Not really sure either how that works. From the Final Rule I linked:

Connector Types

This final rule establishes a requirement that each DCFC port must have a Combined Charging System (CCS) Type 1 connectors. This final rule also allows DCFC charging ports to have other non-proprietary connectors so long as each DCFC charging port is capable of charging a CCS-compliant vehicle.

I think the more overlooked part of this boondoggle of a project is that each charger must have minimum of 4 ports and each port must be capable of suppling 150kW minimum.  So each charger requires a minimum of 600kW power.  That's 300,000 Megawatts of added capacity.  The total generating capacity of the US as of Jan 2024 is 1.3 million megawatts.  So they want to add 23% of the total capacity of the grid in 6 more years.  Anyone seen any power plants being built? Dams? That's only 1.5 million acres of solar panels, I'm sure we can find somewhere to stick them.

[zahc]

It is a problem--we do need more generation -- but every charger won't be running at the same time. There's a capacity factor involved. Just like if every house in the country suddenly ran its entire 200A panel at the same time, it would crash the grid too. Actually if you ran every circuit in your house to full capacity, it would trip your main breaker, because the assumption is basically that won't happen. So you can't add up the raw wattage of all the chargers and compare them to grid generation like that, nice try though. We do need more clean electricity to power all these green schemes though and there's not enough conversation about that. Almost like those in charge don't believe it's actually going to happen and admit it's mostly a grift rather than a serious environmental effort.

[dogmush]

I've done similar calculations with average miles driven and average miles/kW.  The numbers don't get any better. 

Sure, it's a simplistic calculation to just sum them up, but it's an easy estimate and still indicative of the real problem.  If I were being super accurate we'd have to add in all the Tesla, Electrify America, and other private chargers coming on line outside the NEVI program too. And being brutally honest, it's not like the numbers are close enough that they can squeak by anyway.

I'm a big fan of people converting to EV's in the use cases EV's work with, of which there are many, but without the generating capacity that we don't seem to be building the whole thing will fall on it's face.

[Northwoods]

When I was still working for a trucking OEM I ran the numbers on converting all Class 8 trucks to pure BEV.  Depending on the assumptions made it worked out to 1/4 to 1/3 of the total terrawatt-hours produced in 2022 to keep those trucks driving the same miles.  Bear in mind you'd probably need more miles because weight limits will necessarily reduce payloads in a BEV truck.

[Northwoods]

Converting a large fraction of the passenger car fleet to BEV will consume a similar amount of power production.  282mil cars, average 15,000 miles per year, 4 miles per kwh (optimistic) is a little over 1 trillion kwh.  Out of a little over 4 trillion kwh production.

[Northwoods]

No capacity factors needed there.  Going all BEV would consume at least half the annual electricity production in the USA, just to charge the batteries so our economy could continue to function.

There is no rationalizing use of off-peak hours or anything else that will get around the need to massively expand our electricity generating capacity to meet that level of demand increase.

The people in power that are pushing BEVs are simultaneously restricting power plant capacity expansion.

As I said before, the goal is to make the average person unable to own a vehicle at all.  If you (zahc) can't see that you are willfully blind.

[zahc]

No capacity factors needed there.  Going all BEV would consume at least half the annual electricity production in the USA, just to charge the batteries so our economy could continue to function.

There is no rationalizing use of off-peak hours or anything else that will get around the need to massively expand our electricity generating capacity to meet that level of demand increase.

The people in power that are pushing BEVs are simultaneously restricting power plant capacity expansion.

As I said before, the goal is to make the average person unable to own a vehicle at all.  If you (zahc) can't see that you are willfully blind.

It's been getting harder for average people to afford a vehicle for a long time. The small cheap cars are gone, the used starter cars aren't cheap, and nothing is repairable. It's been getting worse and worse for a long time long before BEVs came along. In fact one of the best things to boost car ownership would be to allow import of cheap cars including cheap BEVs. So I don't see bev as part of that puzzle

[cordex]

As I said before, the goal is to make the average person unable to own a vehicle at all.  If you (zahc) can't see that you are willfully blind.

Given previous conversations, I’m fairly certain zahc sees that as a feature not a bug. People should live in a city, ride trains where they are allowed, and not own a vehicle.

[Northwoods]

It's been getting harder for average people to afford a vehicle for a long time. The small cheap cars are gone, the used starter cars aren't cheap, and nothing is repairable. It's been getting worse and worse for a long time long before BEVs came along. In fact one of the best things to boost car ownership would be to allow import of cheap cars including cheap BEVs. So I don't see bev as part of that puzzle

Cars are more expensive for a variety of reasons, mostly because the fed.gov has mandated increasing levels of emissions controls and "safety" technology. Plus, with CAFE standards tied to vehicle volume a larger car is better (for the OEM) but also makes it more expensive. Add in decades of cheap credit and a culture of asking "how much per month" instead of "how much" and we have the current mix of new cars on the market.

None of which has bugger all to do with the EV boondoggle.

BEV cars would, if sold at similar profit margins, cost double or more what comparable ICE cars sell for.  Factor in the power issues (which I notice you conveniently haven't addressed) and the average person cannot afford to live how they otherwise do now, and own and drive a suitable vehicle. Though as cordex notes, that may be a feature rather than a bug to your statist mindset.

[230RN]

I'm new to this issue, so help me out here.  dogmush said:

"I think the more overlooked part of this boondoggle of a project is that each charger must have minimum of 4 ports and each port must be capable of suppling 150kW minimum.  So each charger requires a minimum of 600kW power.  That's 300,000 Megawatts of added capacity."

By "each charger," does that mean each charging "parking space" charger has to be able to deliver that 150 kW to four different cars simultaneously?

If so, the 600kW power total makes numerical sense.

But if each charging station only needs to deliver 150kW to one single vehicle at a time regardless of the type of connector for that car, it doesn't, and multiplying 150 x 4 to get a total of 600kW does not.

Where has my thinking gone wrong?  At 85 yo, I sometimes miss a critical qualification when trying to understand something.

Help!

Maybe I should go look physically at a charging station setup....?

Terry, 230RN

Typos:

[zahc]

Cars are more expensive for a variety of reasons, mostly because the fed.gov has mandated increasing levels of emissions controls and "safety" technology. Plus, with CAFE standards tied to vehicle volume a larger car is better (for the OEM) but also makes it more expensive. Add in decades of cheap credit and a culture of asking "how much per month" instead of "how much" and we have the current mix of new cars on the market.

None of which has bugger all to do with the EV boondoggle.

BEV cars would, if sold at similar profit margins, cost double or more what comparable ICE cars sell for.  Factor in the power issues (which I notice you conveniently haven't addressed) and the average person cannot afford to live how they otherwise do now, and own and drive a suitable vehicle. Though as cordex notes, that may be a feature rather than a bug to your statist mindset.

I don't think you can justify calling me a statist, but I'd like to see you try.

Your first bit about cars being expensive is true and just repeats what I already said. "They" want every American to perpetually have a car payment (or 3) and burn hundreds of dollars of gas per month just to exist and live life, and that's been the goal of the system for a long time before BEVs came along, I mean going back to the GM-Standard Oil scandal, Charles Wilson, and just about every bit of transportation policy ever created in the US, and impossible not to see unless you just never peek out of your consumer-bubble. The American auto industry is either fighting, slow-walking, or tentatively embracing BEVs which tells you everything you need to know, really. If they didn't think Americans would buy BEVs they wouldn't have had Uncle Joe just ban imports. They went from "EVs are impractical and Americans don't want EVs" to "please save us from having to compete with foreign EVs" in about one New York minute.

Your allegations that BEVs would cost double ICE cars is not supported by the facts. Globally there are many affordable BEVs and of course many expensive ICE cars, with cars of the same category being comparable.

[zahc]

Given previous conversations, I’m fairly certain zahc sees that as a feature not a bug. People should live in a city, ride trains where they are allowed, and not own a vehicle.

This is not correct and I generally think people should do what they want, and pay for it themselves to the greatest extent practical, and be free to do so.

[dogmush]

"

By "each charger," does that mean each charging "parking space" charger has to be able to deliver that 150 kW to four different cars simultaneously?

If so, the 600kW power total makes numerical sense.
:

For a charger to be eligible for the federal money we were discussing in this thread it needs to meet a bunch of different standards in the NEVI rule.  One of the standards is each "charger" must have four connectors. Those ports can be all Direct Current Fast Charger (DCFC) or a mix of DCFC and AC level 2 ports.

Another standard is:

Power Level

This final rule establishes a requirement that each DCFC located along and designed to serve users of designated AFCs must simultaneously deliver up to 150kW, as requested by the EV, and that each AC Level 2 port be capable of providing at least 6 kW per port simultaneously across all AC ports with an option to allow the customer to consent to accept a lower power level to allow power sharing or to participate in smart charge management programs. This final rule also clarifies that power sharing is permissible above the minimum 150-kW per-port requirement for DCFCs.

So 600kW is the "worst case".  If you build a charger with all 4 ports DCFC, then each port must deliver 150kW by itself.  However, in charging stations of this type (along highways for travel use) DCFC's are the vastly preferred charger, as they are way faster.  So it's not unreasonable to assume that that's what the ports will overwhelmingly be.

[230RN]

"..must simultaneously deliver up to 150kW..."

OK, that clears that up, thanks. Wow.  Hoady makrel.

NOTE:  I deleted a wisecrack in this post about needing silver or superconducting wiring in these chargers.  I think maybe that's what prompted MillCreek's comment below about people swiping the copper out of these chargers before I deleted it.

Doncha just hate it when a joke premise turns out to be factual?

[MillCreek]

I read in the Seattle media today that EV chargers in Seattle are being stripped for their copper.  People are using battery saws or angle grinders to slice through the cable.

[WLJ]

People are using battery saws or angle grinders to slice through the cable.

Well at least they're using electric tools and not evil gas powered ones.

[230RN]

  ^ LOL. 

[MillCreek]

Well at least they're using electric tools and not evil gas powered ones.

Being a bicyclist, I have seen many videos of miscreants using the Makita, et al, battery angle grinders to slice through the U-locks, chains, cables, etc. to steal bicycles.  Amazing how fast they are.  The industry is coming out with grinder-resistant locks and I am watching that with interest.

[zahc]

Just another reminder that we can't have nice things, including environmentalism, if we don't have law and order. The coastal states will eventually have to come to grips with the reality that none of their utopian visions matter if they don't have a functioning society as a pre-requisite.

[WLJ]

Well at least they're using electric tools and not evil gas powered ones.

Being a bicyclist, I have seen many videos of miscreants using the Makita, et al, battery angle grinders to slice through the U-locks, chains, cables, etc. to steal bicycles.  Amazing how fast they are.  The industry is coming out with grinder-resistant locks and I am watching that with interest.

I was making a joke about everything needs to be electrics or you're destroying the earth

I have several such tools and they can make short work of cutting through things with the right attachment

[Angel Eyes]

I read in the Seattle media today that EV chargers in Seattle are being stripped for their copper.  People are using battery saws or angle grinders to slice through the cable.

Not just happening in Seattle.

[JTHunter]

It's been getting harder for average people to afford a vehicle for a long time. The small cheap cars are gone, the used starter cars aren't cheap, and nothing is repairable.

I beg to differ.
Last summer, some "S'head" punk speeding and passing in a center turn lane skewed the front of my 2008 Ford Ranger towards the passenger side.  State Farm totaled it and the body shop I've been going to since 1982 had it fixed in less than 10 days.  Considering that truck has less than 10K miles (and is still on the same tires !), using most of that insurance check was worth it, esp. when compared to new mid-sized pick-ups.
Then, I just paid Hyundai $4,600 to repair a "worn dowel" on my timing gear and a bushing on the steering column.  The labor costs were about 50% of the total bill but again, that 2011 Elantra has less than 76K and new models of the Elantra have some stupid plastic framework on the passenger side of the center console, making it nearly impossible to reach for something on the floor of the passenger side without bruising your ribs!  And forget EMTs trying to get you out the passenger door after an accident !!