EV Vehicle recharge

[shtferbrains]

Let's subsidise everything.

We will all be floating on a cloud a freshly printer money. More is always better.

[chuckChuck]

Why does the oil industry need subsidies, incentives and low royalty rates? And then leave taxpayers to pay for the clean up of old wells and facilities?

[shtferbrains]

A charger at every parking spot?

Lot of city folks live in appartments or park on the street.

But they probably won't be the ones getting the EV subsidies.

Why do people buying a Tesla or an Electic Hummer like sleepy Joe used for his announcement need taxpayer subsidies and mandates.

Same for personal use solar.
Large for profit solar farms get subsidies and then sell power to Amazon so they can greenwash and not have to pay carbon tax. Subsidies on subsidies.

Get the subsidies out and let the wealthy pay thier own. Why do they need taxpayer money to buy Tesla's?

[chuckChuck]

Good one A5. I already said using renewables and storage to replace all fossil fuel generation sources was impossible. But you already forgot that because of your short memory. Just like you seem to forget that 60% of Canada's electricity is already from renewable hydro?

But that doesn't stop you from going on a rant about how many Tesla batteries we would need to do that, wasting your time and ours.

As I said we have many months where our solar system produces more than we use. On a daily basis that surplus can be used to charge an EV. Did you really think I was suggesting that you can store the surplus for a season? LOL Only fools would believe that. But maybe that is part of your problem.

When most commuters go to work their cars generally sit doing nothing for the day during which time utility scale renewables can provide a lot of electricity for recharging. Since most daily commuter trips are short city trips, EVs work well for that purpose

And not one utility is currently planning for intermittent renewables to supply all their electricity. But that dosen't mean renewables won't make a significant contribution to low carbon energy supplies.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Quoting chuck Any excess in the surplus months can easily be stored in an EV battery and help reduce reliance on fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions
What a brilliant solution. Did you come up with that all by yourself? So we each just need to buy enough $50,000+ EVs to store the excess solar during the summer, so we can use it in the winter when the sun doesn't shine. Sounds like a carbon neutral plan to me.
But perhaps I have misunderstood you, and you only expect to store it for one day at a time, not seasonally. In which case the typical commuter will plug their car into the solar panels to charge it when they are not using the car. According to the car and driver article where I was reading the Anderson report, they used the number of 90% home charging. So 90% of commuters who don't happen to work the night shift, will be plugging their electric vehicles into the solar panels at night to charge them up to store the electricity for the next day's commute during the daylight hours.
That sounds almost as practical as storing excess June solar energy in an EV to be used in December.

Unfortunately, Chuck hasn't responded, so I'm not sure which way he plans on using electric cars to store solar power. But I did the math anyways.
A Tesla model 3 (depending on year and range options) stores 75 kWhs of electricity when new.
In Quebec where they already use electric heating and cooking( which is where we are all supposedly heading in order to be carbon neutral, so it is a good proxy), annual electricity consumption for a single detached house is 24,000 kWh.
As we previously discussed, in a real world application where downtime is not acceptable, in this case using solar panels to run small injection pumps at remote oil wells, they are installing 3 months worth of battery storage at our latitude. I would say heating a house in a climate that can be -40 degrees is a situation where downtime is not acceptable, so we need to store 1/4 of a years worth of power.
3 months worth is a mere 6000 kWh's assuming the load is eveny distributed throughout the year, which it obviously isn't, considering that 55% of the 24,000kWh is for heating. But I'll stick with that for simplicity.
So at 75kWh per car, it would only require 80 Tesla model 3's to store enough electricity from solar in the summer, to keep your house warm and lit ( and most importantly, keep the internet functioning so you can troll agriville) all winter.

Base model is only $60,000, so it would only cost $4,800,000.00 to buy enough Tesla cars to be self sufficient year round using solar power.

Unless of course you also want to drive the Tesla's during the winter, after charging them during the summer, then you will need quite a few more than the 80 calculated above, since they can't both power your house all night, and then drive to work and back the next day.

And as mentioned above, a garage big enough to heat all these EV cars and their batteries, in order to get the full 75 kWh of charge out of them, so add the heating requirements of an 80 car garage. Definitely going to need a few more Tesla's just to heat the garage with electric heat. But then that will require a bigger garage, which will require more EV's...
This could snowball to an unmanageable number of cars in a hurry.

Alternately, we could listen to the resident Tesla owner.
Last time you brought up this genius idea, AB4 told you that is was a completely impractical waste of time and technology.
But as usual, you don't come here to learn, so you repeat the same mistakes over and over.

[helmsdale]

Pumped storage too
https://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ne...mpany-proceeds

We've gone BANANA's... We have decided to "Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything". This same crowd is in tight collaboration with NOPE or Not On Planet Earth.

[checking]

Does it get any better than radical environmentalists fighting environmentalists over EV vs. lithium procurement.

Super volcano in Nevada has a mega lithium deposit. Should it be exploited, cc.

[farming101]

What improved infrastructure? Have you seen the militant opposition to any new power lines, or generation? Chuck's NFU has invested more energy in opposing any new hydro dams such as site C, than have into any ag related issues. Interestingly enough,Chuck just refuses to acknowledge that contradiction, while promoting hydro as the renewable solution.
The greens and NIMBYs are now protesting not only the power lines, but the solar and wind installations as well.
Paying for it is the least of our troubles.

Pumped storage too

https://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/news/local-news/petition-against-meaford-pumped-storage-plan-filed-as-company-proceeds

[Hamloc]

Except chronic naysayers like you and A5 never seem to acknowledge that many EVs can be charged by low carbon renewable sources of electricity including hydro in many provinces. Canada has a lot of hydro relatively speaking.

Even in Alberta which is switching all its coal facilities to NG there is about a 50% reduction in carbon emissions with gas over coal.

And just because there are some periods of the year when wind and solar don't provide much electricity that doesn't mean they can't provide a lot of electricity to charge EVs throughout the rest of the year.

As always the naysayers always focus their criticism on the windless and sunless periods to "prove" that solar and wind are not feasible. Wrong!

Saskpower and several Alberta utilities have demonstrated over and over again that both solar and wind are part of the transition away from fossil fuels.

On our farm solar is providing more than our average annual electricity usage. Most months our solar puts out far more than we use. Except for aeration grain drying in the fall. And in some winter months close to or more than we use.

Any excess in the surplus months can easily be stored in an EV battery and help reduce reliance on fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions.

And as I mentioned in a previous post its clear that EVs can have a lower energy cost than ICE vehicles. Up front costs are still higher, but as EVs take over market share those upfront costs will come down.

Chuck explain to me how in Alberta utilities have demonstrated over and over again that both wind and solar are part of the transition away from fossil fuels?!

Let’s look at simple numbers Chuck. Alberta’s total generation capacity is 17224 megawatts. At 1:13 pm today Albertan’s are consuming 11432 megawatts. Let’s say Alberta had 17224 megawatts of wind generation capacity. Right now the wind farms are producing at 9.7% of capacity. So if we had 17224 mw of generation capacity producing at 9.7% we would have 1670 megawatts of electricity being produced or 14.6% of what is required. What that proves to me is that wind generation is nothing more than expensive virtue signalling that doesn’t create dependable electricity. Groups like Greenpeace firmly believe renewables are the only future path, this drought in wind power is going on six days now during a period of extreme cold, no battery storage could last that long. Hydro is not considered environmentally friendly by groups like Greenpeace, personally I have no issues with hydroelectric power. And I think Nuclear is fantastic. Apparently Germany doesn’t, I read a headline in Reuters that Germany was closing down 3 of their remaining 6 nuclear power plants. As for transitioning away from fossil fuel generation, if you take a realistic look at the numbers the proof is that renewables aren’t the answer! Oh LOL!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Please?

What improved infrastructure? Have you seen the militant opposition to any new power lines, or generation? Chuck's NFU has invested more energy in opposing any new hydro dams such as site C, than have into any ag related issues. Interestingly enough,Chuck just refuses to acknowledge that contradiction, while promoting hydro as the renewable solution.
The greens and NIMBYs are now protesting not only the power lines, but the solar and wind installations as well.
Paying for it is the least of our troubles.