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.
I don't think the move to EV's is going to give anyone the results they are expecting, or claiming. The only thing for sure is some people are going to get rich.
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.
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.
It's a bit different with regulated forced monopolies. There is only one set of wires running to your house, so you have zero choice in who provides your electricity. That's the forced monopoly part. They are regulated by government entities and aren't allowed to set their own prices to keep them from taking advantage of their customers. Parts of the main transmission grid are deregulated/open market (utilities and large factories can buy electricity from whoever they want), but most normal electricity purchasers don't have a choice.
Utilities have to work with these government entities to set rates. Every so often the utility presents financial data to justify proposed rate changes. The regulating entity reviews the data and either approves or denies the rate changes.
Capital costs, such as a new generating plant, new substation, new transmission lines, or even modernizing upgrades to existing equipment to increase capacity, are allowed to be counted in the rate calculations. General maintenance costs are not generally allowed, other than as a set percentage of the overall budget along with things like payroll. Almost every project I work on has a discussion as to whether the costs can go to a Capital budget or to the Maintenance budget. Maintenance budgets are generally very limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humphrey_C_Earwicker
Can you point to any claim by a generator or distributor, that they have insufficient funds to modernize?
I am aware of many instances where projects were canceled either because a rate increase to pay for it was denied, or they weren't able to get that project approved as a Capital expense, or because some other emergency took all the allocated Maintenance budget. I can point to specific cases where a utility straight ignored necessary maintenance/repairs until things literally fell down and caused outages. But I still work in the industry and will for some time. Some of the cases are involved in lawsuits. So no, I won't provide specifics here.
Let’s use the Texas subfreezing temps a few yrs ago as an example. The high use of electric heater caused major power outages shows a big problem with our grid. To charge EV at level 1 charging is about the same as a 1000watt microwave or 6000BTU window AC. Multiply that by 100k on top of existing appliances then we have another grid problems.
Not to mention the Fed wants to mandate gas stove ban which will increase more electrical use.
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.
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.
The real reason is that stupid EPA fleet average mileage standard-- impossible to meet with ICE production alone. They need to "dilute" the average with the EVs...and even more stupid is that the average is based on cars built, not cars sold...Once they've built them, they want to recoup some of the production costs, so they're advertising them heavily.
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.
It's not sustainable, soon the cost of the precious minerals like cobalt and even copper prices will soar and become too expensive to produce. Oil production is already the most technologically advance and efficient than it has ever been. It's gonna hold steady and batteries will eventually cost way more than the entire cost of the car.
Its not just lithium or cobalt. We simply don't have enough of any of the metals or REEs needed to shift this rapidly to EV. We don't even have enough to build the grid out to handle the extra capacity.
Its not going to happen. When the deadline nears all these states passing mandatory EV laws will revisit and kick the can down the road. None of them will meet the deadline.
Eventually, we could shift to a mostly EV society, but it's going to be a whole lot longer than even 25 years.
The cleanest energy source we have is nuclear. But people don't want to hear that and they are expensive.
Natural gas is next, but climate change alarmists don't want to hear that either.
Solar and Wind simply cannot provide all the energy we need. It would take great technological leaps to get to the energy storage required to make it feasible. Then you have to overcome the sheer amount of just copper needed, which we simply don't have. Much less all the other resources needed.
I mean California has enough energy grid problems with its current load. Just imagine even a million more people trying to charge their cars every day. If they start now, they are decades away from upgrading the grid enough to handle it.
I am all for using renewable energy but it needs to be done intelligently.
I think the biggest benefit we could immediately reap is to start concentrating on building power plants and upgrading the electrical grid. Using renewable energy sources efficiently is another big one. Solar panels don't even make sense in about half of the US. It's a waste of a solar panel, they could be far more efficiently used in the appropriate places.
EVs in my opinion is a huge waste of resources currently. It's a mistake to promote them with subsidies. All you are doing when you buy one is exporting your pollution to third-world countries. Not even going to get into the absolute travesty of child labor powered mining operations in the Congo.
In fact, we would do more help to the environment if we stopped adopting EVs and concentrated on helping third-world countries to upgrade their energy sources to nat gas and clean coal. To stop clearing forests. To stop dumping sewage and trash in their rivers. To adopt more sustainable agriculture practices. Doing these things would help far more than buying EVs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humphrey_C_Earwicker
I'm shocked! To a greater or lesser degree that's what every gas station in the country currently does with their fuel purchases.
Gas stations do not set their fuel price, they have a negotiated rate with a distributor that they charge a few cents above. The only gas stations making money on selling gas are the big travel stops that move huge volumes.
While CA is mandating that no gas powered vehicles to be sold by 2035 and only BEV (Battery powered Electric Vehicles) to be sold. But the harsh reality is that, car makers won't be able to meet the demand and the infrastructure won't even be close to providing the electrical grid necessary.
There's simply not enough minerals to produce that many batteries. That's the simple truth.
We don't have the manpower to setup the charging network at every parking spot. Look at how many solar panels on rooftops that's been installed the last 25 years. That's how long and how many charging spots will be available in 25 years.
It doesn't matter if everybody is given a free Tesla, it would be quite useless for majority of people who don't own a home nor close to a charging spot to connect regularly.
Go watch the documentary on cobalt mining and tell me why are we pushing for EVs when there's simply not enough minerals and workers to mine the precious minerals and humanitarian catastrophe to subject these miners at the worst possible conditions.
Are we really doing nature and people good with these mining operations?
The math already shows it's not possible to replace even 10% of current gas powered cars with electric.
This article, World Economic Forum calls to reduce private vehicles by eliminating 'ownership' (link) tells you all you need to know. The whole idea is to let that "cat out of the bag" slowly. Excerpt:
Quote:
The World Economic Forum is looking to reduce global reliance on critical metals as nations look to make the transition to renewable energy supplies, and one proposal is reducing ownership of private vehicles.
"This transition from fossil fuels to renewables will need large supplies of critical metals such as cobalt, lithium, nickel, to name a few," the forum said in a report earlier this month. "Shortages of these critical minerals could raise the costs of clean energy technologies."
****
"More sharing can reduce ownership of idle equipment and thus material usage," the group argued, pointing to statistics that show the average vehicle in England is driven "just 4% of the time." Vehicle sharing initiatives like "Getaround" and "BlueSG" have become increasingly popular around the world and are key in reducing the number of cars and electronics needed globally, the forum argued.
The idea is to reduce mobility, in a manner similar to the Covid lockdowns. The thinking is that we are living an unsustainably high lifestyle. This is not new, see Did Sumptuary Laws in 18th Century England, Morph in Puritantism and Modern Self-Abnegation. Even in the Middle Ages, the Christian culture decidedly did not agree with "epicureanism", or "let the good times roll." I read about this in The Swerve: How the World Became Modern by Stephen Greenblatt. I did not think of any modern connections in thought, Indeed, I had thought that this line of thinking was recent, a response to post-War prosperity.
Returning to the topic of this thread, there would be popular revolt if the real agenda of the BEV proposed mandates were publicized.
While CA is mandating that no gas powered vehicles to be sold by 2035 and only BEV (Battery powered Electric Vehicles) to be sold. But the harsh reality is that, car makers won't be able to meet the demand and the infrastructure won't even be close to providing the electrical grid necessary.
There's simply not enough minerals to produce that many batteries. That's the simple truth.
We don't have the manpower to setup the charging network at every parking spot. Look at how many solar panels on rooftops that's been installed the last 25 years. That's how long and how many charging spots will be available in 25 years.
It doesn't matter if everybody is given a free Tesla, it would be quite useless for majority of people who don't own a home nor close to a charging spot to connect regularly.
Go watch the documentary on cobalt mining and tell me why are we pushing for EVs when there's simply not enough minerals and workers to mine the precious minerals and humanitarian catastrophe to subject these miners at the worst possible conditions.
Are we really doing nature and people good with these mining operations?
The math already shows it's not possible to replace even 10% of current gas powered cars with electric.
And really, what's absurd is believing the government isn't aware of all these facts. And that being the case, we have to wonder what the REAL agenda is here. Because it isn't anything related to a concern for the lives of ordinary Americans who require transportation. Because if you and I can know these facts - it's absurd to think the people running the government didn't know it first.
There's an agenda at work. And this is the smoke screen.
And really, what's absurd is believing the government isn't aware of all these facts. And that being the case, we have to wonder what the REAL agenda is here. Because it isn't anything related to a concern for the lives of ordinary Americans who require transportation. Because if you and I can know these facts - it's absurd to think the people running the government didn't know it first.
There's an agenda at work. And this is the smoke screen.
So, as long as the regressives continue to believe that minerals grow on trees, or that EVs can run on rainbow dust and unicorn farts, this BEV industry isn't likely to take off. But the subsidies and black money will make many Dems rich.
The amount of minerals that will be required for EVERYBODY to have an EV means that the US likely needs hundreds of new mines. But, we can't even get two off the ground despite years of studies and debate.
They know that. As I responded above that's the whole point. This is a mess of their deliberate making.
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.
