EVs - New Hampshire gets it right

[tumbler]

Why don't EV's have a battery recharging component to them? If they could recharge some % of the battery when braking and gliding it would have to add to the range and help in the cold.

 

[NYDB]

Why don't EV's have a battery recharging component to them? If they could recharge some % of the battery when braking and gliding it would have to add to the range and help in the cold.

most do.

I've been driving a gm electric this year. it's not my main car but is the wife's main car. great for shuttling the kids around. cost wise the electric to charge it has been equivalent to 50 mpg ice car.

ymmv

 

[Newpylong]

Just watching this thread, it seems that some of you really don't like the thought of EV's. For some I think it is purely a political thing. EV simply means Liberal agenda so it is obviouly a no go. That is a very short sited view. I personally hope they figure out a way to make it work out efficiently. It has a lot of benefit.

I think it goes both ways. When you have folks with "that agenda" spewing EVs out of all holes, it's fairly easy to understand why something that should not be political, is.

It's too bad VW blew it w/dieselgate. My wife had Jetta TDI and at 50+ GPM vehicles like that surely could help bridge the gap until the EV technology and prices are more acceptable.

 

[1dog]

If you look at things rationally, the charging time is of minimal significance. The average person drives 13,5000 miles a year. So, 259 miles a week. That is basically the typical range of an EV. The average person will never even need to use a roadside charger. They plug in their car overnight one evening and they're good to go for the week.

I drive about 50k miles a year due to work. Cover all of New England. Unless I'm going to Ft Kent, Caribou Presque Isle or Calais, I could make it to basically every hospital I do business with one overnight charge. I bet even with my heavy mileage habits, there are less than ten days a year I exceed 250 miles travel in a day. Those ten days aren't enough to turn me off to the car type. Time the charge at lunch. No big deal.

Increased adoption will occur with increased variety and affordability first and foremost. Once you start seeing several mid sized SUV options with 300 mile ranges and sale prices around 40k, the adoption rate will start to take off. And that price point will happen. EV cars are easier and faster to build than ICE. Economics of scale will make them cheaper to produce than ICE vehicles eventually because of what goes into them.

I'll go back to the point I've made already. ICE vehicles are about 25% efficient vs 75% for EVs. EVs are cheaper to build for the manufacturer and cheaper to maintain for the consumer. Hell the amount of time I waste getting tune ups in a year easily eclipses whatever time I'd waste at a roadside charger. It's pretty obvious where this story is heading because of these realities.

The only reason why I don't have an EV already is because I get a van provided to use for my work and my wife's car is a manual, which we both prefer to automatic transmissions. More fun to drive and it's not available with an EV. Once that car dies, there are no AWD wagons left being made with an MT, so we will get an EV. I'd estimate around 2027 and I fully expect a lot of choices with vastly improved ranges by then.

Wish I had your optimism DH. And maybe I would if all this EV stuff were happening without tax money supplying the gap between what they lose as compared to what they create. Its not close to profitable. Even still, no one has answered the simple question of where all this electricity will come from/be created by? Then larger question is storage - it has to be used- can't be stored ( in scale). No technology for that yet either.

My understanding of hydrogen is it takes a lot more energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen so it is not efficient.

As for the political connection - its easy - government now = money ( in form of subsides) so of course the EV/solar/wind folks want to support that view. Without it, they do not exist. We either subsidize/control all business ( socialism/fascism) or allow free market with limited regulation to rein. Of course that also begs the question- where is the money? Print it?

 

[cdskier]

I think it goes both ways. When you have folks with "that agenda" spewing EVs out of all holes, it's fairly easy to understand why something that should not be political, is.

Right...I'm not against EVs at all. I just think there are a lot of valid gaps and concerns that still need to be addressed before they're actually a viable option for everyone. And when someone dismisses those concerns as "irrelevant" or says "well they only impact some people so they're not really a big deal", that's when you end up creating more of that pushback against EVs where people end up viewing it as more of an "agenda" item rather than a non-political topic.

 

[ceo]

Why don't EV's have a battery recharging component to them? If they could recharge some % of the battery when braking and gliding it would have to add to the range and help in the cold.

All EVs have regenerative braking, it's one of the reasons they're much more efficient in city driving than ICE vehicles. On some EVs the regen is blended in with the regular brakes, and on others it kicks in when you lift off the accelerator, so you can drive with one pedal most of the time.

 

[Edd]

All EVs have regenerative braking, it's one of the reasons they're much more efficient in city driving than ICE vehicles. On some EVs the regen is blended in with the regular brakes, and on others it kicks in when you lift off the accelerator, so you can drive with one pedal most of the time.

This goes for hybrids also.

 

[AdironRider]

If you look at things rationally, the charging time is of minimal significance. The average person drives 13,5000 miles a year. So, 259 miles a week. That is basically the typical range of an EV. The average person will never even need to use a roadside charger. They plug in their car overnight one evening and they're good to go for the week.

I drive about 50k miles a year due to work. Cover all of New England. Unless I'm going to Ft Kent, Caribou Presque Isle or Calais, I could make it to basically every hospital I do business with one overnight charge. I bet even with my heavy mileage habits, there are less than ten days a year I exceed 250 miles travel in a day. Those ten days aren't enough to turn me off to the car type. Time the charge at lunch. No big deal.

Increased adoption will occur with increased variety and affordability first and foremost. Once you start seeing several mid sized SUV options with 300 mile ranges and sale prices around 40k, the adoption rate will start to take off. And that price point will happen. EV cars are easier and faster to build than ICE. Economics of scale will make them cheaper to produce than ICE vehicles eventually because of what goes into them.

I'll go back to the point I've made already. ICE vehicles are about 25% efficient vs 75% for EVs. EVs are cheaper to build for the manufacturer and cheaper to maintain for the consumer. Hell the amount of time I waste getting tune ups in a year easily eclipses whatever time I'd waste at a roadside charger. It's pretty obvious where this story is heading because of these realities.

The only reason why I don't have an EV already is because I get a van provided to use for my work and my wife's car is a manual, which we both prefer to automatic transmissions. More fun to drive and it's not available with an EV. Once that car dies, there are no AWD wagons left being made with an MT, so we will get an EV. I'd estimate around 2027 and I fully expect a lot of choices with vastly improved ranges by then.

I don't disagree with you on the efficiency of EV's, other than to point out your efficiency argument gets weaker the colder it gets, but you are really pushing your personal motives if you don't think charge time or access to reasonable charging facilities doesn't matter for the average person. That is a huge detriment to EV's and not workable at the vast majority of home or workplaces.

 

[mister moose]

I can see where EVs will do well in commuter driving. Not so much in long distance, trailer pulling, or below zero driving. Better to let the market determine what's best for each driver. The grid infrastructure can't power everyone going to EV anyway.

Not only is there going to be a tax/mile (gas taxes are about 43 cents/gal), why not peg insurance to miles driven?

 

[deadheadskier]

I don't disagree with you on the efficiency of EV's, other than to point out your efficiency argument gets weaker the colder it gets, but you are really pushing your personal motives if you don't think charge time or access to reasonable charging facilities doesn't matter for the average person. That is a huge detriment to EV's and not workable at the vast majority of home or workplaces.

Vast majority? Not at all. A minority of people would have issues.

Again, the majority of people in this country have access to electricity where they park overnight already. The average American drives 259 miles a week. While I don't disagree that more and faster charging will be a benefit, range is already not an issue for the majority of drivers today.

I think the people in this forum are applying their long distance driving habits to ski or other far off activities as the norm for most people. It's not. Most people do not drive very far in their cars like we skiers do. I think the concerns being expressed here about charging are overblown. It would appear that the manufacturers share that same view. Almost all of them are all in on developing more of these vehicles.

ICE personal vehicles will be around for many years longer, but the writing is on the wall that the vast majority of them are heading to the dust bin eventually

 

[cdskier]

Vast majority? Not at all. A minority of people would have issues.

Again, the majority of people in this country have access to electricity where they park overnight already. The average American drives 259 miles a week. While I don't disagree that more and faster charging will be a benefit, range is already not an issue for the majority of drivers today.

Again, the numbers you're using are not the right ones to use. The number of homes with a garage is NOT the same as the number of cars that have access to said garages overnight.

A much better analysis was performed by the US DOE. The numbers they see aren't even close to the numbers you're using. Actually they're almost the opposite. They state that currently (as of 2021 when the report was created) only 33% of vehicles would currently have access to electric overnight. That number increases to just over 50% based on how many people think electric access could potentially be installed near where they usually park. These numbers also highly shift based on socio-economic factors. (Renters were substantially less likely to have access vs owners, people in apartments substantially less likely than single family homes, lower income people were less likely to have access than higher income families, etc).

One of their conclusions was that non-home charging (i.e. fast public charging) was a major factor that needed to be addressed to reach high levels of EV usage.

 

[deadheadskier]

I guess we are going to disagree on the numbers. The department of energy is providing the figures I'm stating. 63% of all housing units in this country have a garage or carport with electricity already or the capability of having it installed.

Given current realities, more people would be just fine with an electric car than those who would have a problem. That is only going to grow and yes, more roadside chargers are obviously going to help. I just don't think it's the problem you all do

 

[cdskier]

I guess we are going to disagree on the numbers. The department of energy is providing the figures I'm stating. 63% of all housing units in this country have a garage or carport with electricity already or the capability of having it installed.

Given current realities, more people would be just fine with an electric car than those who would have a problem. That is only going to grow and yes, more roadside chargers are obviously going to help. I just don't think it's the problem you all do

You're missing the whole point that the numbers are not the right ones to use. The same entity can put out 2 sets of numbers that mean two different things. The number of homes with a garage (or access to electricity) is different than the number of vehicles that have access to that. Homes to vehicles is not a 1:1 ratio (and there are other factors as well that impact the relevance of the data).

Actually the numbers you're using aren't really from the DOE anyway. The DOE is just repeating the numbers from the Census Housing Survey data that happened to capture that data in their data set (but it was not the focus of their survey as it analyzes a lot of different data related to housing). The study I'm referring to was specifically conducted by the DOE on the other hand with the specific purpose of analyzing EV residential charging access and the impact on adoption and the future of EV charging infrastructure.

 

[BodeMiller1]

We can all agree EVs do every thing they can to save on weight. What you end up with a lot of plastic and air bags. Air bags are great for the first hit. Once the bags are inflated, then what hope for the best. Much of this is generation driven. The over 50 crowd doen't want the baggage which come with them. I can live without self driving cars, being tracked and the radiation that goes with 5G.

In another couple of decades if 1 out of 100 kids has 3 arms will it be worth it?

When we built seabrook the promis was NO MORE PLOWING ROADS. We'll just run heating coils under them and wala; no more salt etc. I drove a buddies Tesla it was fun and fast. Butt there again so am I.

 

[JimG.]

So the government while promoting EV uses an ICE car to reserve a charging spot...nice...

I had a good laugh when I read this earlier today.

 

[JimG.]

I've never been an early adopter of new tech.

Never got past the Beta/VHF debate.

 

[1dog]

I've never been an early adopter of new tech.

Never got past the Beta/VHF debate.

Beta was better- VHS won, not sure why, but its gotta be a money thing.

100% emissions free? https://uploads.disquscdn.com/image...df3208c9c631e3457da171cf0b65b2ef9da73f87e.jpg

Thats disingenuous.

Good piece on current issues with EV's: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/09/road-trip-3.php

 

[Smellytele]

Not Cars but...

This record-setting, hydrogen-fueled plane promises to change air travel forever: ‘Will go down in the history books’

“We have committed to being North America’s first zero-emission airline.”

www.yahoo.com

 

[kbroderick]

We can all agree EVs do every thing they can to save on weight. What you end up with a lot of plastic and air bags. Air bags are great for the first hit. Once the bags are inflated, then what hope for the best. Much of this is generation driven. The over 50 crowd doen't want the baggage which come with them. I can live without self driving cars, being tracked and the radiation that goes with 5G.

That's true of all vehicles now. Less weight == better mileage, all else being equal, and particularly for vehicles with large sales numbers, even a 0.1 MPG difference has a significant impact on fleet averages.

I say this as the owner of a beer-can F-150. I'm actually a fan of the aluminum body because it doesn't rust, but there's clearly a lot of effort in making the truck more efficient.

 

[jimmywilson69]

the radiation that goes with 5G.

In another couple of decades if 1 out of 100 kids has 3 arms will it be worth it?

5G radiation???

This sounds like early 2000s talk when we were all going to grow 3rd testicles because we had cell phones in our pockets... LOL

Back on track here...

We need better infrastructure for EVs (charging and electrical grid). They need better range, longevity, and reliability. I drive my cars for a long time and don't want to have to replace them before its time. All that being said I have a relatively short commute to work and a garage. Perhaps they will be for me sooner than later. They just need to become more practical and right now they are just barely meeting that threshold.