Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of the EV manufactures are moving away from using the ICE platform for building these EV's. They are designing them from the ground up using mostly aluminum. This comes at a huge environmental cost,aluminum production has a considerable CO 2 footprint, at 8.24 kg of CO2 per kg of aluminum extracted, as the demand for aluminum increases so will the CO2 tonnage.
Most Current Ice cars are mostly aluminum, and have been for a long time. The reason why they are promoting EV is because an EV has lower assembly costs than an ICE and thus can have higher profit margins.
With all the talk about the less than desirable aspects of EV manufacturing/sales in the US we seem to have suffered some type of amnesia with regard to the slow evolution of the motor car. At first introduction, the automobile was seen as a public menace, scaring horses and people alike. Noisy, smelly, and seen as way too expensive when compared to bicycles or horses. It seems as though we are at the infancy level now with the EV's, but in many ways, we've already established much of the necessary engineering to allow for a much quicker evolutionary path to open up for a much improved electric car.
As with most of our manufacturing infrastructure challenges with regard to the environment, the EV will come with it's own set of "green" challenges, and not just confining the conversation to the car itself, but moreover, the entirety of manufacturing processes that surround it's construction. The EV evolution will most likely be on the same or even larger scale than the invention and improvements of the automobile but there's no doubt about the inevitable trajectory of the EV and it's support technology.
The one downside I see with the rush to go all electric lies in my suspicions that the electrical generating giants will want to go directly to Nuclear power, and when the need to have tons more electric power becomes a pinch point, society may go along with it, just as we've dug a large hole of unintended consequences by relying on fossil fuels in the quest for mass internal combustion power..
I work in the electric utility industry. BEVs are here to stay, but the electric grid isn't anywhere near ready for a mass BEV expansion. People who say we'll go 100% BEV anytime soon are living in a fantasy world.
People who park on the street or in garages don't have access to overnight chargers. Even if they did, if 40 million Californians had BEVs and plugged them in all night the grid would simply collapse.
It isn't just getting charging stations added (we're adding more every day), it's getting the electrical generation and backbone transmission grid upgraded. Two or three public charging stations pull as much electricity as a small town.
Sticking with California, there was a massive build-out of their electrical grid in the early 20th century. Some structures are well over 100-years old. The majority of towers are long past their original design service life. There is metal fatigue, corrosion, and other issues. So in addition to adding capacity (generation and transmission), they've also got to either strengthen, repair, or replace large chunks of their existing capacity.
Politicians love to talk, but reality is reality.
Edit to add: To clarify, global warming is real, and BEVs are needed. My next vehicle will be either a BEV or HEV (probably Hybrid because of all the rural driving I have to do). But again, reality is reality.
^^^^
I don't think anyone is claiming that problems with generation and distribution have to be fixed by the weekend after next.
Nor is it likely that 40M Californians will all be plugging in anytime soon.
^^^^
I don't think anyone is claiming that problems with generation and distribution have to be fixed by the weekend after next. Nor is it likely that 40M Californians will all be plugging in anytime soon.
From what I've been reading the BEVs are best if recharged during the late night hours when demand for electricity goes way down and power plants are either generating excess power or taking boilers off-line. For many people with short commutes, or retirees like us with little driving, recharging would be once every few days not every night.
Rooftop solar can generate the power needed to recharge BEVs as well as powering some of the household load.
It's not like this "new" demand will be dropped on the utilities all at once, it will be gradual and IF our dear corporate and government leaders can get their heads out of the sand we will solve this without breaking a sweat. BUT do not count out the efforts of the fossil fuel industry and Wall Street to resist this with pots of campaign dark money and a barrage of lies to create fear and hesitation in consumers. I'm waiting for some forward-looking state government to require electric utilities to pay for rooftop solar on our homes and scrap plans for billion dollar fossil fuel power plants with massive transmission towers marching off to the horizon. Times change. Technologies changes. We need to move to our own future.
Vehicle manufacturing firms -- worldwide -- are going full speed ahead on BEVs, the writing is on the wall for the internal combustion engine, and there is nothing to fear. We consumers need to help by buying BEVs and kissing OPEC goodbye.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 01-20-2023 at 12:00 PM..
^^^^
I don't think anyone is claiming that problems with generation and distribution have to be fixed by the weekend after next.
Nor is it likely that 40M Californians will all be plugging in anytime soon.
True, but perhaps I wasn't clear enough:
Without massive investment in the USA's electrical infrastructure, switching to all BEVs within 50 years, or even switching to only BEVs being sold in California in 12 years (with ICVs still rolling), is a fantasy.
Add in the fact that the majority of electrical transmission organizations are for-profit corporations subject to the whims of stockholders, which means that "maintenance" is almost never a priority for funding (see disclaimer below), and funding is generally allocated based on the "will it last until I retire" mentality. I have been in a meeting with a large utility where a high-level manager literally asked that question.
It will take decisive government directives and/or funding before anything will happen. Yet another case of corporate welfare, but it'll have to happen to get a reliable grid. It'll have to be like stopping the nationwide cascading blackouts from 20 years ago. First the gov said, "you really need to do this thing, please", and nothing happened. So they had to step in and say, "do this thing NOW or lose funding", and finally things happened.
ASCE rates our electrical infrastructure as a "C-". They are celebrating recent increases in maintenance spending to near $22 billion annually, but they project the maintenance funding gap to reach almost $200 billion within 6 years. That's in addition to investments needed to provide extra capacity for BEVs. That's over 9x as much spending. That's a lot of lost shareholder profit.
Disclaimer: I have to say that most California utilities actually are sinking lots of funding into maintenance and repair lately. Not to provide power for BEVs, but because transmission lines were blamed for several recent deadly wildfires. But still, a strong grid is the first step.
Clarification: I feel this needs to be said on all my posts or else people will think I'm anti-electric vehicle. I am not, and my next vehicle will be a BEV or HEV. I want politicians and corporations to get their act together and work to save the world, but then I am a realist and know that the majority of people don't care enough to vote with their wallet. Sure, they'll consider buying a BEV. But will they then willingly allow a significant electrical rate increase (compounded by suddenly using far more electricity themselves) to provide the money to upgrade the grid?
Last edited by An Einnseanair; 01-20-2023 at 12:00 PM..
There should be no taxpayer funded bailouts of electric utilities, governments gave them regulated monopoly status to put the infrastructure in place to generate, distribute and maintain their infrastructure, along with a level of pricing to assure paying the bills and a nifty profit of about 6% per year without having to compete with anyone. They ARE being paid to do the right things and keep their grids in proper working order.
If utilities fail to do so and come to us with their hand out looking for free money from taxpayers the correct answer is to take over that utility via eminent domain and run it as a publicly owned utility. Back in Colorado Springs we had a city-owned utility providing gas, electric, water and sewer services; the service was excellent and the rates were 20-25% lower than nearby Pueblo, CO with its for-profit provider.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
There should be no taxpayer funded bailouts of electric utilities, governments gave them regulated monopoly status to put the infrastructure in place to generate, distribute and maintain their infrastructure, along with a level of pricing to assure paying the bills and a nifty profit of about 6% per year without having to compete with anyone. They ARE being paid to do the right things and keep their grids in proper working order.
If utilities fail to do so and come to us with their hand out looking for free money from taxpayers the correct answer is to take over that utility via eminent domain and run it as a publicly owned utility. Back in Colorado Springs we had a city-owned utility providing gas, electric, water and sewer services; the service was excellent and the rates were 20-25% lower than nearby Pueblo, CO with its for-profit provider.
I 100% agree this "should" be the case. I need to mention that maintenance typically comes directly out of profits. Things like capital upgrades (new generating plants, new transmission lines) can be used to apply for increased rates, but not maintenance.
I also live in an area with a public utility. Remarkably low electric rates, and (no exaggeration) the fastest residential internet on the planet. I could get 25Gbps (not 2.5; 25.0) to my house if I wanted. I believe that all necessary utilities (electric, water, gas, sewer, and data) should either be public-owned or very heavily regulated and inspected. If any corporation takes taxpayer money, that money should be in exchange for stock shares. If they do it too many times, the government now owns the company.
That said, I live in the real world. Corporate Welfare is a thing, and happens every day. Something will happen, the former CEO will bail out with their golden parachute, and the company will go crying to government, "The bad former CEO took all our money and we don't have enough to provide power to the local orphanage. You have to give us money or they will freeze this winter." The taxpayers will pay.
Corporations spend bazillions of money on lawyers and lobbying to prevent any form of eminent domain. They also spend bazillions on media "infotainers" who convince their followers that any government takeover of private corporations is socialism (gasp!). So the cycle will repeat.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,550 posts, read 81,103,317 times
Reputation: 57750
With the current liberal governments banning new natural gas connections, and talk of banning gas stoves, the problems with electrical grids already will only get worse. The expansion to handle this and the increase in EVs will cost a lot that will be passed on, and rates will climb to meet or even surpass the cost of filling the tank with gas. Already some EV chargers are
charging well over their kWh charge, and you can expect them to raise the charges and get profits once more people depend on them.
I 100% agree this "should" be the case. I need to mention that maintenance typically comes directly out of profits. Things like capital upgrades (new generating plants, new transmission lines) can be used to apply for increased rates, but not maintenance.
I also live in an area with a public utility. Remarkably low electric rates, and (no exaggeration) the fastest residential internet on the planet. I could get 25Gbps (not 2.5; 25.0) to my house if I wanted. I believe that all necessary utilities (electric, water, gas, sewer, and data) should either be public-owned or very heavily regulated and inspected. If any corporation takes taxpayer money, that money should be in exchange for stock shares. If they do it too many times, the government now owns the company.
That said, I live in the real world. Corporate Welfare is a thing, and happens every day. Something will happen, the former CEO will bail out with their golden parachute, and the company will go crying to government, "The bad former CEO took all our money and we don't have enough to provide power to the local orphanage. You have to give us money or they will freeze this winter." The taxpayers will pay.
Corporations spend bazillions of money on lawyers and lobbying to prevent any form of eminent domain. They also spend bazillions on media "infotainers" who convince their followers that any government takeover of private corporations is socialism (gasp!). So the cycle will repeat.
Edit: Forgot my disclaimer. BEVs are good.
The underlined applies to any business. They make a gross profit, use that to pay all operating expenses, including maintenance. What's left is the net profit. Every long distance trucker builds a percentage for maintenance into their rates, so too with Utes. All big businesses/industries spend big on lobbying. Utilities are no different. Can you point to any claim by a generator or distributor, that they have insufficient funds to modernize?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140
With the current liberal governments banning new natural gas connections, and talk of banning gas stoves, the problems with electrical grids already will only get worse. The expansion to handle this and the increase in EVs will cost a lot that will be passed on, and rates will climb to meet or even surpass the cost of filling the tank with gas. Already some EV chargers are charging well over their kWh charge, and you can expect them to raise the charges and get profits once more people depend on them.
I'm shocked! To a greater or lesser degree that's what every gas station in the country currently does with their fuel purchases.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 01-20-2023 at 04:18 PM..
Reason: Merged 2:1
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
