Ev vehicles sask

[chuckChuck]

Millions upon millions of cars mostly making short commuter trips results in cars with all that expensive technology sitting and not doing much most of the day anyway. 23 hours parked, and less than 1 hour driving in many cases.

But they have a large battery that could have other uses. I am not sure what will happen, but it is part of the discussion as we decarbonize.

[chuckChuck]

I just don't understand the concept of taking a useful vehicle and turning it into a stationary paperweight in your garage to power your house. A car has tires, wheels, brakes, air bags, sound system, air conditioning, aerodynamic design, battery pack that is designed to optimize energy to density. It just doesn't make sense to use it to power a house or grid. The stationary battery can be more efficient, have better latency, and more battery cycles. It just seems to me like using your iPhone as a hammer, like it kinda works but why?

Also hydrogen is a complete scam from a physics standpoint. Hydrogen has no place in the transportation sector. Diesel makes more sense than hydrogen imo.

[ATTACH]8948[/ATTACH]

Millions upon millions of cars mostly making short commuter trips results in cars with all that expensive technology sitting and not doing much most of the day anyway. 23 hours parked, and less than 1 hour driving in many cases.

But they have a large battery that could have other uses. I am not sure what will happen, but it is part of the discussion as we decarbonize.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

“Usual suspects” “flat earthers” “etc” right outta the manual

It appears he should just stick with the flat Earth comments, it seems to be the only thing that he is good at, good thing he has the manual to back him up or he would probably even screw that up. Reality just earned another point, Chuck still zero.

Edit. I was wrong, apparently he can screw that up too, even with the manual as evidence by the double posting above.

[ALBERTAFARMER4]

Millions upon millions of cars mostly making short commuter trips results in cars with all that expensive technology sitting and not doing much most of the day anyway. 23 hours parked, and less than 1 hour driving in many cases.

But they have a large battery that could have other uses. I am not sure what will happen, but it is part of the discussion as we decarbonize.

True, but once the vehicle learns how to drive itself it can be used for many more hours per day.

https://youtu.be/Ui9qjDgVXco

[AlbertaFarmer5]

So now you have appointed yourself scorekeeper after your failed attempt at censorship and bullying. LOL

Would you prefer if no one keeps score? If so I would understand completely, since real world physics just scored another one, and you are still stuck at zero.
But how could I fail at something I have never attempted? I do not support censorship. I have publicly supported your right to come on here and embarrass yourself by spouting off about topics of which you don't have any clue about. Such as this one.

[Hamloc]

V2G will never really be a thing and here's why. A car is engineered to travel down a highway a 60+mph and be safe in an accident. The thermal system is designed to deal with temps between -40 and +40 under varying loads. EV should be autonomous and delivering rides for more hours of the day. What I'm saying is that your EV would be better utilized as a taxi moving people around instead of sitting at home being used as a stationary battery. The whole point of a stationary battery is that it is always connected. Harvest energy during surplus and expel energy during high demand times. When the utility has a network of internet connected stationary batteries it will be able to reinforce the stability of the grid much better. Trying to manage the grid with cars in a million different places that may or may not be plugged in and at different states of charge seems like a logistical nightmare.

You raise a very important point, if car’s batteries became an essential part of storing excess solar energy how could you assure enough were plugged into the grid to harvest the supposed excess energy? Also how would you reimburse consumers for shortening the effective life span of the battery in their vehicle? I agree that the stationary battery makes far more sense but again how do you reimburse consumers for taking care of the capital cost of energy storage? At present subsidies for solar installations only apply to grid tie installation and do not subsidize battery storage.

[Hamloc]

True, but once the vehicle learns how to drive itself it can be used for many more hours per day.

https://youtu.be/Ui9qjDgVXco

First off I will thank AB4 for actually being willing to have an intelligent debate. Using a self driving car as a taxi while not in use is certainly an interesting idea. I am curious though how you feel this would affect the economy over all as this would certainly lower the number of cars needed to be purchased by consumers.

[Guest]

yes his/her comments have really got me thinking
very intriguing , unlike chucky's constant name calling, greater than thou comments

[WiltonRanch]

I am echoing many here saying what a breath of fresh air AB4 to have an intelligent and interesting conversation about ev’s and other such topics. This is how a conversation should take place. I honestly know nothing about this stuff and now know less the more I learn here. Something said about winning the hearts and minds than brow beating and being a dick.

[chuckChuck]

yes his/her comments have really got me thinking
very intriguing , unlike chucky's constant name calling, greater than thou comments

So where exactly does such a sensitive person like yourself find "name" calling in this thread?

Its been an interesting discussion on EVs.

[chuckChuck]

It appears he should just stick with the flat Earth comments, it seems to be the only thing that he is good at, good thing he has the manual to back him up or he would probably even screw that up. Reality just earned another point, Chuck still zero.

Edit. I was wrong, apparently he can screw that up too, even with the manual as evidence by the double posting above.

A5 you just stick to calling everybody who disagrees with you a marxist and leave the EV discussion to A4 who seems to have a much better grasp of the possibilities than you do. And leave the score keeping to the readers.

Tried to delete the second post but didn't work for some reason.

[Guest]

So where exactly does such a sensitive person like yourself find "name" calling in this thread?

Its been an interesting discussion on EVs.

A quote from the self proclaimed expert

Furrow partly on side with EVs and climate change! Hell is about to freeze over!

As far as name calling. Am I the only one? LOL

You cry babies deliver your fair share of name calling and more. You can dish it out but your sure can't take it.

The bigger problem is the nonsense and lack of evidence that goes with it from many of the usual suspects. Reply With Quote Like

Just one of your many many postings telling everyone else they’re stupid, Chucky
On this very thread LOL
Take a page from AF4 and come to the table with something intelligent , grown up shall we say
Then maybe someone will take you serious

[Old Cowzilla]

I think if the build an EV 1/2 ton that can go 500 miles between charges pullin a load of pregnant cows at 110 kms/hr and has those big knobby tires so you can hear them coming 20 miles away IT WILL SELL LIKE HOTCAKES !!

[the big wheel]

I don’t understand why they aren’t or maybe they
Are developing these Evs to charge when they
Are driving? Couldn’t they eventually not need
To stop and be charged if they developed
That efficiently?

[bucket]

I think if the build an EV 1/2 ton that can go 500 miles between charges pullin a load of pregnant cows at 110 kms/hr and has those big knobby tires so you can hear them coming 20 miles away IT WILL SELL LIKE HOTCAKES !!

How do you add the straight pipe noise as well?