Grid and Electric Vehicles

On Friday, 1 September 2023 at 18:24:09 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
...
> My model X generally gets 3 mi/kWh sometimes getting as low as 2.5 mi/kWh, and less often close to 4 mi/kWh (much less often). Mostly this depends on the roads traveled. 50-55 mph roads give the best mileage, although stop and go traffic actually gives the best. Weird, huh? Just goes to show how EVs are different from ICE. 
...

Tesla cars (and all other EVs as far as I know) indicate battery energy usage on the internal display (and through any phone app) and do not include the inefficiency of the AC to DC conversion.

Also in the case of Tesla they do not include parasitic losses such as occur when stationary but not in gear or when parked.

My Tesla Model 3, for example, indicates a long term average of 235 Wh/mile on the internal display but my measurement of the AC power gives a figure closer to 330Wh/mile.

I used to get 4.7mi/kWh (AC energy) with my previous car, a Chevrolet SparkEV.

I charge using 240V where the AC to DC conversion is about 90-92% efficient. When using 120V the efficiency drops to about 80% which will increase the AC consumption further.

An overall average efficiency of 3 mi/kWh for AC energy consumption across all types of EVs is, I think, a reasonable value.

kw

On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:55:56 PM UTC-4, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
> On Friday, 1 September 2023 at 18:24:09 UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> ...
> > My model X generally gets 3 mi/kWh sometimes getting as low as 2.5 mi/kWh, and less often close to 4 mi/kWh (much less often). Mostly this depends on the roads traveled. 50-55 mph roads give the best mileage, although stop and go traffic actually gives the best. Weird, huh? Just goes to show how EVs are different from ICE.
> ... 
> 
> Tesla cars (and all other EVs as far as I know) indicate battery energy usage on the internal display (and through any phone app) and do not include the inefficiency of the AC to DC conversion. 

Which is very low.  Pretty much every part of the energy chain from the power plant to stepping on the accelerator is highly efficient in an EV.  

I actually do monitor the energy at the EVSE or the fast charger and the loss is  low. 


> Also in the case of Tesla they do not include parasitic losses such as occur when stationary but not in gear or when parked. 

Actually, this is factored in.  When I drive the car for the first time each day it shows a slug of energy used that is not part of driving.  Also, all the energy adds up.  If I use 55 kWh driving, the battery has 55 kWh less energy than when I started. 


> My Tesla Model 3, for example, indicates a long term average of 235 Wh/mile on the internal display but my measurement of the AC power gives a figure closer to 330Wh/mile. 

Where do you measure this?  I don't see this discrepancy.  


> I used to get 4.7mi/kWh (AC energy) with my previous car, a Chevrolet SparkEV. 
> 
> I charge using 240V where the AC to DC conversion is about 90-92% efficient. When using 120V the efficiency drops to about 80% which will increase the AC consumption further. 

I see some losses when charging from 120V, but others tell me they don't see this. 


> An overall average efficiency of 3 mi/kWh for AC energy consumption across all types of EVs is, I think, a reasonable value. 

I don't agree.  I generally get 3 mi/kWh in a model X which is a fuel burning pig.  That's factoring in everything drawn from the wall. 

-- 

  Rick C.

  -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 1:37:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> > > to the charger. 
> > > 
> > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> > 
> > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
>
> I added this comment to the video: 
> 
> You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants. 

Of course he did. It's not just the Woke crowd, but everybody who understands that anthropgemic global warming is seriously damaging our environment who wants to see all fossil-fueled power plants shot down.

> Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land.

They aren't unreliable, merely intermittent, and while 1% of the planet's land area is a huge amount of land it's not a problem to find enough of it, particularly when you can grow crops and graze animals between the solar  panels. Wind turbines are even less of a problem. Sewage Sweeper doesn't really seem to believe in grid storage. There isn't enough of it yet, but is is geting bought and installed.,

> Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity.

Air conditioners are electric anyway. Running air-conditioner backwards (reverse cycle air-conditioning, which is what I've got) replaces gas furnaces. Using a heat pump to warm your hot water is less popular (though it would save you money). Around here stoves are mostly electric, and induction hobs are replacing  gas rings  on cook-tops. 

None of it will make as much difference as moving over to electric vehicles, and getting more grid generating capacity has never been a problem in the past - in the US it went up but 5% per year every year from 1950 to 2000 without anybody making any fuss about it.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:24:09 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:16:52 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 2:37:26 PM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 12:10:09 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 11:37:51 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> > > > > > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > > > > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > > > > > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> > > > > > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> > > > > > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> > > > > > > to the charger. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> > > > > > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> > > > > > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> > > > > > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> > > > > > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Rick C. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
> > > > > > -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 
> > > > > I added this comment to the video: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants. Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land. Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity. 
> > > > The first calculation this guy does is wrong. He uses some silly figure (33.7 kWh/gallon of gas) to calculate the total amount of energy needed to power all passenger cars in a year. But that's the wrong calculation and the 33.7 kWh is the total energy in the gasoline, taking into account none of the efficiency issues of gas cars. Here's how you do the actual calculation. 
> > > > 
> > > > 230 million cars (his number) 
> > > > * 13,500 miles/(car year) 
> > > > / 4 miles/kWh 
> > > > = 0.776 trillion kWh/ year, not 1.2 trillion 
> > > They don't get 4 mi/kWh, most of the smaller, and cheaper ones people will be buying, do 3 miles /kWh. That ratio of the 3 to 4 in range rate is the same as the ratio of your results. 
> > "They"??? I'm talking about the numbers from my bucket of volts, which I check on a regular basis. The Tesla model 3 and Y (more conventional sizes of cars) get 4 mi/kWh regularly and up to 5 mi/kWh. My electron guzzler gets more like 2.5 to 3 mi/kWh. 
> > 
> > You can be in denial as much as you like, but these are facts. 
> > > > Everything I see in his video is similar, using a poor numerical basis and then making gross errors like saying drawing 1,800 W is the same as running a vacuum cleaner. That has got to be one monster vacuum! 
> > > There's so much variation in every aspect of the attempted calculation that the results can be expected to have quite a bit of variation too. There's nothing wrong with his calculations, His main failing is not realizing his estimate is low and the real numbers can vary over a 2:1 range minimum. 
> > > > 
> > > > How can I believe anything the guy says? 
> > > YouTube is like that, a cesspool of misinformation. 
> > Much like sed. 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > Rick C. 
> > 
> > ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
> > ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
> I see I posted inconsistent numbers. I sometimes get them mixed up because of the reciprocal values some people use, mi/kWh vs. Wh/mi. 
> 
> My model X generally gets 3 mi/kWh sometimes getting as low as 2.5 mi/kWh, and less often close to 4 mi/kWh (much less often). Mostly this depends on the roads traveled. 50-55 mph roads give the best mileage, although stop and go traffic actually gives the best. Weird, huh? Just goes to show how EVs are different from ICE. 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick C. 
> 
> --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
> --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Not really. Stop and go traffic is at the slowest speeds, hence the lowest parasitic drag. And braking is regenerative, so little losses there. This is one advantage of EVs and hybrids.

On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 1:37:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> > > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> > > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> > > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> > > > to the charger. 
> > > > 
> > > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> > > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> > > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> > > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> > > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> > > 
> > > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
> >
> > I added this comment to the video: 
> > 
> > You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants.
> Of course he did. It's not just the Woke crowd, but everybody who understands that anthropgemic global warming is seriously damaging our environment who wants to see all fossil-fueled power plants shot down.

Hey Bozo, that IS the Woke crowd.

BTW, you MISSPELLED "anthropogenic"

> > Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land.
> They aren't unreliable, merely intermittent, and while 1% of the planet's land area is a huge amount of land it's not a problem to find enough of it, particularly when you can grow crops and graze animals between the solar panels. Wind turbines are even less of a problem. Sewage Sweeper doesn't really seem to believe in grid storage. There isn't enough of it yet, but is is geting bought and installed.,

Same difference, Bozo. You can't SCHEDULE the wind or the sun. Yes, land use IS a problem, Bozo, especially if you want to locate generation close to population centers.

> > Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity.
> Air conditioners are electric anyway. Running air-conditioner backwards (reverse cycle air-conditioning, which is what I've got) replaces gas furnaces. Using a heat pump to warm your hot water is less popular (though it would save you money). Around here stoves are mostly electric, and induction hobs are replacing gas rings on cook-tops. 

Hey Bozo, another example of your shot-from-the-hip mentality; you better do your homework. Yes, there ARE gas a/c units. Electric heat pumps stop working below around 0 C and require resistive heating for colder temps. The power for those resistive heaters comes from GAS generators, so TWICE as much gas is used to heat the SAME area than if gas furnaces were used from the get-go.

> 
> None of it will make as much difference as moving over to electric vehicles, and getting more grid generating capacity has never been a problem in the past - in the US it went up but 5% per year every year from 1950 to 2000 without anybody making any fuss about it. 

LOL! You can FORGET that growth IF they start shutting down fossil plants, IDIOT!!

> 
> -- 
> Bozo Bill Slowman, Sydney

Bozo's Sewage Sweeper

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:10:49 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 1:37:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> > > > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > > > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> > > > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> > > > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> > > > > to the charger. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> > > > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> > > > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> > > > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> > > > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> > > > 
> > > > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
> > > 
> > > I added this comment to the video: 
> > > 
> > > You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants. 
> > Of course he did. It's not just the Woke crowd, but everybody who understands that anthropogenic global warming is seriously damaging our environment who wants to see all fossil-fueled power plants shut down. 

> Hey, that IS the Woke crowd. 

That is your deluded opinion. "Woke" is usually taken to mean people who base their opinions on what is currently fashionable, and lots of people took climate change seriously long before it got fashionable/

<snipped the usual reaction to a typo> 

> > > Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land. 
>
> > They aren't unreliable, merely intermittent, and while 1% of the planet's land area is a huge amount of land it's not a problem to find enough of it, particularly when you can grow crops and graze animals between the solar panels. Wind turbines are even less of a problem. Sewage Sweeper doesn't really seem to believe in grid storage. There isn't enough of it yet, but is is getting bought and installed.
>
> Same difference, Bozo. You can't SCHEDULE the wind or the sun. 

The sun is extremely predictable - clouds less so - but you can design your system to cope. You probably couldn't, but you are an idiot.

> Yes, land use IS a problem, Bozo, especially if you want to locate generation close to population centers.

That's what high voltage transmission lines are designed to cope with. You need to learn about them.

> > > Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity. 
>
> > Air conditioners are electric anyway. Running air-conditioner backwards (reverse cycle air-conditioning, which is what I've got) replaces gas furnaces. Using a heat pump to warm your hot water is less popular (though it would save you money). Around here stoves are mostly electric, and induction hobs are replacing gas rings on cook-tops.
>
> Hey Bozo, another example of your shot-from-the-hip mentality; you better do your homework. Yes, there ARE gas a/c units. 

Einstein invented and patented the basic idea. It works but it isn't very efficient.

> Electric heat pumps stop working below around 0 C and require resistive heating for colder temps.

They don't.  The thermodynamics become less favourable, but Stirling engines work down to very low temperatures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

>  The power for those resistive heaters comes from GAS generators, so TWICE as much gas is used to heat the SAME area than if gas furnaces were used from the get-go.

The power for those imagined resistive heaters comes from imaginary gas generators. so Sewage Sweeper  is engaged in his usual argument by deluded assertion.

> > None of it will make as much difference as moving over to electric vehicles, and getting more grid generating capacity has never been a problem in the past - in the US it went up but 5% per year every year from 1950 to 2000 without anybody making any fuss about it.
>
> LOL! You can FORGET that growth IF they start shutting down fossil plants, IDIOT!! 

They are shutting fossil plants rapidly in Australia and investing a lot in cheaper renewable generation - solar farms and wind-farms. You do make fatuous assertions.

If the US utilities were controlled by half-wits like you, they might not invest in getting more of their energy from cheaper renewable sources, but this doesn't seem to be true.

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney 

On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 09:10:03 -0700 (PDT), Ricky
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 11:37:51?AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
>> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37?AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
>> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27?AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
>> > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
>> > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
>> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
>> > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
>> > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
>> > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
>> > > to the charger. 
>> > > 
>> > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
>> > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
>> > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
>> > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
>> > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
>> > 
>> > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > 
>> > Rick C. 
>> > 
>> > -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
>> > -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
>> I added this comment to the video: 
>> 
>> You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants. Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land. Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity.
>
>The first calculation this guy does is wrong.  He uses some silly figure (33.7 kWh/gallon of gas) to calculate the total amount of energy needed to power all passenger cars in a year.  But that's the wrong calculation and the 33.7 kWh is the total energy in the gasoline, taking into account none of the efficiency issues of gas cars.  Here's how you do the actual calculation. 
>
>230 million cars (his number) 
>* 13,500 miles/(car year)
>/ 4 miles/kWh
>= 0.776 trillion kWh/ year, not 1.2 trillion

With annual 776 TWh energy consumption and 8760 hours in a year, the
average power is 89 GW, which could be produced with less than 100
additional nuclear reactors. That would be two new nuclear reactors in
each US state.

With unreliable renewable sources (such as wind and solar) the
installed nominal capacity needs to be 3-10 times i.e. 270 to 900 GW
to produce that average power.

With 230 million EVs, the average charging power is only 385 W or less
than 4 A from a 120 V mains including some conversion losses. If
generated locally with roof mounted solar panels (150 W/m2) in 6 hours
a 10 m2 solar panel would be required.Local generation will reduce the
distribution network loading.

Large parking lots should have sockets for car charging, so that as
much of solar power from home panels could be utilized during a
working day.

This 385 W for 24 h would of course be the absolute minimum but in
practice the peak for a single car would be 2-4 times that if it needs
to be charged in 12 to 3 hours each day. Still quite manageable.



>
>Everything I see in his video is similar, using a poor numerical basis and then making gross errors like saying drawing 1,800 W is the same as running a vacuum cleaner.  That has got to be one monster vacuum!  
>
>How can I believe anything the guy says? 

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:19:48 AM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 09:10:03 -0700 (PDT), Ricky 
> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> >On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 11:37:51?AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote: 
> >> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37?AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27?AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> >> > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> >> > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> >> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> >> > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> >> > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> >> > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> >> > > to the charger. 
> >> > > 
> >> > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> >> > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> >> > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> >> > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> >> > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> >> > 
> >> > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
> >> > 
> >> > -- 
> >> > 
> >> > Rick C. 
> >> > 
> >> > -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
> >> > -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 
> >> I added this comment to the video: 
> >> 
> >> You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants. Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land. Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity. 
> > 
> >The first calculation this guy does is wrong. He uses some silly figure (33.7 kWh/gallon of gas) to calculate the total amount of energy needed to power all passenger cars in a year. But that's the wrong calculation and the 33.7 kWh is the total energy in the gasoline, taking into account none of the efficiency issues of gas cars. Here's how you do the actual calculation. 
> > 
> >230 million cars (his number) 
> >* 13,500 miles/(car year) 
> >/ 4 miles/kWh 
> >= 0.776 trillion kWh/ year, not 1.2 trillion
> With annual 776 TWh energy consumption and 8760 hours in a year, the 
> average power is 89 GW, which could be produced with less than 100 
> additional nuclear reactors. That would be two new nuclear reactors in 
> each US state. 

No, you can't have any new power generation, until you've used all the power generation you have, now!  

Why do people have to be told over and over again, about the demand curve???  There is somewhere around 1/2 of the total generation capability, available through the 24 hour demand cycle.  

They have a term for generating capacity that can be brought online quickly, it's called "Dispatchable".  Loads are mostly "Right Now" loads, having to be supplied at the time they are turned on.  But... charging EVs is mostly a very flexible load, which can often be scheduled any time over the next two or three days.  We don't have a term for such a flexible load, but it's the load equivalent of "Dispatchable" generation, and means we don't need to build a single kW of generation to charge all 230 million EVs, other than the relatively few which need charging en route.  


> With unreliable renewable sources (such as wind and solar) the 
> installed nominal capacity needs to be 3-10 times i.e. 270 to 900 GW 
> to produce that average power. 

Except that the EV ***IS*** the storage that allows the use of renewable power.  

-- 

  Rick C.

  -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:11:52 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote:
> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 2:11:33 PM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:13:11 AM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > It's going to be higher than that. The MPGe is just a legacy performance measure for consumers to think in terms of the MPG they've been using all their lives. It's used to compare the various EVs and does help in making a buying decision. Other than that it's just a energy measure and doesn't have any other purpose. 
> > 
> > The average EV sold to consumers runs about 1/3 kWh per mile, or 0.333 kWh/mile.
> That's a number plucked from air. I guess you can always find a way to calculate an "average" that will give you all sorts of numbers. But, my model X, which is the EV equivalent of a Buick, gets 3 to 4 miles per kWh (0.25 to 0.33 kWh per mile).

The only way to know with less uncertainty is to use state registration data of all the various types of EVs out there. There's an almost 4:1 spread in the MPGe. Then that MPGe needs to be scrutinized too, to see how representative it actually is in practice. The situation is hopeless iow.


> > The high acceleration performance and SUV types consume twice that. USPS even managed to make a van that does 0.87 kWh/mile- that's so eco-illogical.
> LOL It's a hell of a lot better than 8 miles per gallon!
> > Getting back to average consumer at 0.333 kWh/mile, coupled with their average 13,500 miles annual gets about 4500 kWh annual. EIA has statistics of average residential household energy use at 10,632 kWh annual for latest year of record 2021. Carrying that forward makes for (10,632 + 4500)/10,632=1.42 or a 42% increase in energy use at the residential level. That particular number can also be considered the total energy draw of the residential sector, regardless of where they draw it, i.e. the EV can be charged outside the home or in the home. The particulars of location are the power supplier's problem.
> There's no shortage of bogus numbers to be calculated.
> > Things can change. Better battery technology can increase the kWh/mile. Retail can consolidate sales and delivery resulting in less people on the road.
> The efficiency of EVs is already very, very good. There is precious little wasted energy in EVs, so not a good place to look for improvement in efficiency.
> > Whenever this big transportation transition is supposed to occur, they better have 2X the generation capacity they have today, or there's going to be problems. 
> > 
> > Something like 80% of electrical power in U.S. is fossil fuel, so they have a long way to go.
> God! That is an amazing number!!! 20% is nuclear, leaving zero for wind, solar, hydro, etc. Maybe we are running at greater than 100%? 

You can find more exact numbers, which usually lag by about a year, at the EIA website. Oh wait- you never do anything constructive like that do you?


> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick C. 
> 
> +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
> +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:43:07 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 1:37:51 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:17:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 8:19:27 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote: 
> > > > On 9/1/2023 3:13 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote: 
> > > > > A roughly 16 minute video on the added load of using EVs instead of fossil fueled vehicles in the U.S. One comment is the load at home would be about like running a vacuum cleaner 24 hours per day. The guy is talking about a 30% higher load if all cars are EVs. He didn't mention trucks. 
> > > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfyG6FXsUU&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained> 
> > > > But you don't leave your car on a charger for 24 hours as 
> > > > you likely drive it to work, errands, etc. It's only 
> > > > when you are *done* using it that you'd "retire it" 
> > > > to the charger. 
> > > > 
> > > > So, you'd be home, using electrical loads that would have been 
> > > > off while you were at work (TVs, stove, lighting, HVAC, etc.) 
> > > > and have to complete the recharge before you next needed 
> > > > the vehicle ("Am I *in* for the evening?") 
> > > What are you trying to say? Why not just come out and say it? 
> > > 
> > > It's always the ones who don't have an EV who don't understand them or how they charge. 
> >
> > I added this comment to the video: 
> > 
> > You ignore the fact that the Woke crowd is hell-bent on shutting down ALL fossil-fueled power plants.
> Of course he did. It's not just the Woke crowd, but everybody who understands that anthropgemic global warming is seriously damaging our environment who wants to see all fossil-fueled power plants shot down.
> > Solar and wind can't replace this production because they are unreliable and require huge amounts of land.
> They aren't unreliable, merely intermittent, and while 1% of the planet's land area is a huge amount of land it's not a problem to find enough of it, particularly when you can grow crops and graze animals between the solar panels. Wind turbines are even less of a problem. Sewage Sweeper doesn't really seem to believe in grid storage. There isn't enough of it yet, but is is geting bought and installed.,
> > Also, it is not just that they want us to switch our cars to electric, they want ALL of our energy use to be electric: no gas furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc. This WILL impact the peak usage of electricity.
> Air conditioners are electric anyway. Running air-conditioner backwards (reverse cycle air-conditioning, which is what I've got) replaces gas furnaces. Using a heat pump to warm your hot water is less popular (though it would save you money). Around here stoves are mostly electric, and induction hobs are replacing gas rings on cook-tops. 
> 
> None of it will make as much difference as moving over to electric vehicles, and getting more grid generating capacity has never been a problem in the past - in the US it went up but 5% per year every year from 1950 to 2000 without anybody making any fuss about it. 

It's the density of power draw that goes to make all the difference. People in U.S. are really opposed to building what they consider to be ugly infrastructure in expensive suburban areas. This is why the people who look at gross average expansion required for the whole country are clueless dweebs who don't know what they're talking about. Power generation expansion is going to have be located far off from urban centers, over 100 miles in most cases, and those locations are going to have to have easy access to an existing system of 'energy corridors' which consist of huge HVDC transmission line structures already in place. If things bog down into acquiring new right-of-way's, it may never happen. You wouldn't believe the problems they're having just building out relatively modest size 'undergrounding' transmission.

> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney