The biggest issue by far right now for EVs is the grid cannot support the influx of new electricity demand caused by EV charging. Since 80% of charging is done at home, the average home uses between 20 and 30% more electricity for each EV they own, which has to come from the grid (absent distributed generation like solar panels).
The grid has seen massive underinvestment in infrastructure over the last decade+ in terms of power generation capacity, but specifically transmission capabilities. Even if you could magically drop 30 million EVs in the US, with the necessary amount of chargers, it would collapse the grid. Grid infrastructure upgrades don't exactly win you votes either, its kind of an out of sight out of mind thing, so the political will to make the necessary investments isn't really there.
This transition is gonna take way longer than some of the more optimistic forecasts think. There is literally 0 shot that 100% of cars sold in 2032 will be EVs, like some posters have said. There are many moving parts here that tend to get missed by people that think you can snap your fingers and decarbonize immediately.
You are correct that the grid needs to be modernized. The new infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act both help address those concerns.
Thankfully, we won't magically drop 30 million EVs in the US tomorrow. But I am confident that in time, the grid will be built out to handle the extra load. It will be just like when air conditioners became all the rage.
Yeah I agree it will get built out in time, but that time is longer than some people might currently expect.
There are some interesting potential applications for EVs to counteract the grid imbalances including Vehicle to Grid (V2G) and Vehicle to Home (V2H). Your EV can act as a storage system dispensing excess power back to the grid (V2G) or directly to your home (V2H). Not really a big believer in V2G, but V2H is an interesting supplement to an existing stationary battery storage system, particularly as an emergency source of power. Someone more knowledgeable than me can chime in on potential battery degradation with bidirectional charging, but I don't think there is a large enough sample size yet to draw any hard conclusions.
You are correct that the grid needs to be modernized. The new infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act both help address those concerns.
Thankfully, we won't magically drop 30 million EVs in the US tomorrow. But I am confident that in time, the grid will be built out to handle the extra load. It will be just like when air conditioners became all the rage.
Yeah I agree it will get built out in time, but that time is longer than some people might currently expect.
There are some interesting potential applications for EVs to counteract the grid imbalances including Vehicle to Grid (V2G) and Vehicle to Home (V2H). Your EV can act as a storage system dispensing excess power back to the grid (V2G) or directly to your home (V2H). Not really a big believer in V2G, but V2H is an interesting supplement to an existing stationary battery storage system, particularly as an emergency source of power. Someone more knowledgeable than me can chime in on potential battery degradation with bidirectional charging, but I don't think there is a large enough sample size yet to draw any hard conclusions.
Proponents of V2G say that the charge/discharge cycles are pretty short on average. And the car will make sure you don't drain the battery, which would be bad for degradation. So they say it won't be an issue. But like you, I'd like to see hard data on that before I let my car take part.
Stationary storage is a better solution, IMO.
Overall, I'm pretty optimistic that we can build out the grid to handle the load. As screwed up as our grid is today, we always seem to find a way to make it work.
As for V2H, I also think it's a great idea. I'm waiting to see someone who has an F150 Lightning who has set up its V2H. I'd like to see how it performs.
Hmm. The Boulder police seem to prefer Tesla over the Mach-e. But they want to give Ford a chance, so they will try one Mach-e if Ford will ever deliver it.
Hmm. The Boulder police seem to prefer Tesla over the Mach-e. But they want to give Ford a chance, so they will try one Mach-e if Ford will ever deliver it.
Hmm. The Boulder police seem to prefer Tesla over the Mach-e. But they want to give Ford a chance, so they will try one Mach-e if Ford will ever deliver it.
Hmm. The Boulder police seem to prefer Tesla over the Mach-e. But they want to give Ford a chance, so they will try one Mach-e if Ford will ever deliver it.
That settles it folks. If the Boulder PD bought 4 teslas and one Mach-e, then it must mean something….
You’re really desperate for validation aren’t you.
You are not qualified to be in this discussion. Move along.
Those police officers are going to use the 4 Teslas to chase down criminals. The Mach-e is too slow so it will stay at the station. They just bought the one Mach-e so they can use its frunk to ice down their beer when they finish a shift.
That settles it folks. If the Boulder PD bought 4 teslas and one Mach-e, then it must mean something….
You’re really desperate for validation aren’t you.
You are not qualified to be in this discussion. Move along.
Those police officers are going to use the 4 Teslas to chase down criminals. The Mach-e is too slow so it will stay at the station. They just bought the one Mach-e so they can use its frunk to ice down their beer when they finish a shift.
I’ll remember that the next time I want to use my Mach-e as a police cruiser. lol
Are you finished making a fool out of yourself yet?
Earlier in the article it says that EVs and hybrids generate more emissions than ICE cars do but over time the EV will generate fewer emissions than the ICE and eventually generate fewer if given enough time. But if you are going to get a new car every, say, three to five years, you'll generate fewer emissions buying an ICE than you will buying a hybrid or EV.
Not if someone else continues to drive your EV. If you just threw it away, you would be correct.
Yes. But the same applies to all older cars. Buying a used car means one less new car has to get manufactured so we're spared the emissions that come with manufacturing it.
I'm not really looking to argue an ICE car won't generate more emissions over its life than an EV will. I'm more concerned that EVs are being foisted on us as ready to use just as conventional cars can be used. They aren't. Long road trips clearly are different and less convenient in EVs because of recharge time. But when you point that out the true believers tell you the long stops will make the trip better than one where you drive through. When you say that EVs won't work for loads of people who park on streets they tell you someone will come along and install chargers every few yards on those residential streets. Why would anyone install large numbers of EV chargers on streets where almost no one owns an EV? They tell you that in a while you won't be able to buy gasoline in places like California even though Californians will be driving their ICE cars for many years after the ban, buying newer ones from other states, and buying plug in hybrids, needing gasoline, in California.
When you mention that the electric grid is nowhere near ready to charge all those cars if half the state is driving EVs they tell you it will be a lot bigger then AND powered by renewable energy. There are just so many assumptions EV lovers are making. Maybe they'll be correct but to me there are just too many maybes to think it's a good idea to ban gasoline cars now.
When the first horseless buggies came out, horse people thought that was just a fad. After 5/10 years the horse people finally adopted the horseless carriage and the tractor.
We are perhaps on the verge of a new technology. However we cannot just try to shove this down our throats. We should let this slowly evolve just as we did with the steam engine, the horse and buggy and the gas buggy.
Those police officers are going to use the 4 Teslas to chase down criminals. The Mach-e is too slow so it will stay at the station. They just bought the one Mach-e so they can use its frunk to ice down their beer when they finish a shift.
I’ll remember that the next time I want to use my Mach-e as a police cruiser. lol
Are you finished making a fool out of yourself yet?
Are you finished telling us about your imaginary Mach-e?
Not if someone else continues to drive your EV. If you just threw it away, you would be correct.
Yes. But the same applies to all older cars. Buying a used car means one less new car has to get manufactured so we're spared the emissions that come with manufacturing it.
I'm not really looking to argue an ICE car won't generate more emissions over its life than an EV will. I'm more concerned that EVs are being foisted on us as ready to use just as conventional cars can be used. They aren't. Long road trips clearly are different and less convenient in EVs because of recharge time. But when you point that out the true believers tell you the long stops will make the trip better than one where you drive through. When you say that EVs won't work for loads of people who park on streets they tell you someone will come along and install chargers every few yards on those residential streets. Why would anyone install large numbers of EV chargers on streets where almost no one owns an EV? They tell you that in a while you won't be able to buy gasoline in places like California even though Californians will be driving their ICE cars for many years after the ban, buying newer ones from other states, and buying plug in hybrids, needing gasoline, in California.
When you mention that the electric grid is nowhere near ready to charge all those cars if half the state is driving EVs they tell you it will be a lot bigger then AND powered by renewable energy. There are just so many assumptions EV lovers are making. Maybe they'll be correct but to me there are just too many maybes to think it's a good idea to ban gasoline cars now.
Most of us are rational and understand that there are circumstances where owning an EV does not make sense. I still use my bmw for long trips even though my Mach-e has 300+ range. It’s more convenient to drive it for that. Practically everything else I drive my Mach-e. If i couldn’t charge at home, I doubt I’d have an EV.
Our family has 1999 Ford Ranger and 2002 Acura TL. I doubt an EV will every come close to the cost of ownership or positive environmental impact. Wait for the carcasses of EVs coming, and the negative environmental impact of mining battery minerals.
Are you finished telling us about your imaginary Mach-e?
I guess you’re not finished making a fool out of yourself. Sad.
You are too embarrassed to even tell us what kind of Mach-e you have. Sad.
And it drives so poorly, you won't take it on road trips. Also sad.
But really, I'm sure your Mach-e is capable on a road trip. Although you do have less range than a Tesla. And you don't have access to Superchargers like a Tesla. And it's less efficient, so you need to stop more and charge for longer than a Tesla. And it has less cargo space than a Tesla. It it doesn't drive itself like a Tesla. But I'm sure it's capable. It's just not as capable as a Tesla.
I guess you’re not finished making a fool out of yourself. Sad.
You are too embarrassed to even tell us what kind of Mach-e you have. Sad.
And it drives so poorly, you won't take it on road trips. Also sad.
But really, I'm sure your Mach-e is capable on a road trip. Although you do have less range than a Tesla. And you don't have access to Superchargers like a Tesla. And it's less efficient, so you need to stop more and charge for longer than a Tesla. And it has less cargo space than a Tesla. It it doesn't drive itself like a Tesla. But I'm sure it's capable. It's just not as capable as a Tesla.
Consumer Reports says that Teslas are crap cars. I would buy a Ford mach-e in a hearbeat. Teslas are the bottom of the barrel when looking at reliability. That is all I care about when I buy a car. If I have a 200 mile trip I don't want it breaking down halfway. I would call that a junk car.