And again, this is an example of comparing apples to oranges. These electric vehicles are relatively small cars. And they should be compared to similar size fuel efficient cars, not the average gas vehicle. There are lots of car choices getting 30 city, 45 highway or better. The Toyota Prius gets 51 city 48 highway giving a fuel cost of about $12. Here in the northeast with electric at 17c kwh, and using your above math, the fuel cost on the Prius vs the electric is a wash here.
But I bet the Prius is a far more drivable vehicle, capable of higher sustained highway speeds, etc. and doesn't have the obvious drawbacks for the user that the electric car has.
Well I'm getting out my popcorn to sit back and watch the show in California with this. They [California] had a fit with everyone buying those new TV's which use a bit more energy. (Overloading the electric grid.) In California no one wants any new major electric transmission lines built in their backyard.
If quite a few people buy these cars in California, it will be interesting to see what they do when it places a strain on their electric grid. Neighborhood nukes?
Or for that matter if there was a concentration of these new cars in one neighborhood anywhere. Say 3 homes all on the same electric company transformer. Then all 3 homes get electric vehicles, and they all recharge them at 6:00 pm when they get home on a hot summer day, and also have their AC and everything else going full blast???
Your math is incorrect. Charging at 90amps, 240V for 4 hours is
86Kwh of electricity. At 10c a KWH that would be $8.60. Here in NJ, at about 17c, it would be $15.
Also, the compare can't be made to a internal combustion engine car getting 20MPG. The electric cars are very small cars. So, it should be compared to cars getting 35-40 MPG. You can get a bluetec Mercedes diesel in that range that is a real car. There are plenty of other small cars capable of that mpg too, So assuming 35mpg, I could drive at least 175 miles in a simlar car for the same $15 in energy cost. And those electric energy costs are largely derived from cheap coal from existing plants which are not particularly clean. If we're to build anything remotely clean, ( think carbon sequestration) you can expect the future energy prices to be way higher. Unless we come up for a solution on how to make the electricity, you can't begin to compare costs moving forward.
Oh, and BTW, not to mention situations when the vehicle's lights are on, or when you need heating or even a/c;then the battery would be dead even sooner. (Or just turn the car radio on).
I agree nukes would be a quickly available source of new energy.
But, by solution I mean something that the USA is ready to actually implement now. Many of the same folks who cheer on the electric car as some kind of miracle solution also will not let new nukes be built. That gets back to what I said about needing to address the whole equation, from electric car to where the power is coming from and why you never see that discussed in the media. Only hype about the clean, green electric car.
You have a choice. In his hypothetical case of several homes sharing a transformer, you can either design for worst case or ignore it. The latter could very well result in the transformer overloading and the homes being without power. And his point is a very valid one. The existing transformer loads were calculated based on some assumptions of what loads would be in the future and a worst case scenario had to be calculated. I would not be surprised that suddenly having homes where new 70A loads for 4 hours appear could exceed the system design, with his transformer loading being a good example.
As for using a longer term lower current, there are two big problems with that:
1 - The longer it takes to recharge the car, the less attractive these cars become and they become totally excluded from many applications. That's especially true when you compare their operating costs with similar size ICE cars available today, eg hybrids, that have no charging issues.
2 - In today's instant gratification world, I doubt many people are going to want to charge it at less than the maximum. You need to run a new circuit to charge them anyway, so why would you not make it capable of charging at the max? And once you have that 90A circuit, you know people are going to use it. You could discourage this by offpeak pricing. But that gets back to what I said a long time ago, which is that you need to talk about a COMPLETE solution, from energy generation to the point of usage, not just an electric car. Yet, the miracle, clean, green electric car is all the media cares to talk about.
On Feb 15, 3:23=A0pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." wrote: .
Two points Paul ........................ An 'echo' of what we have been encountering (in Canada) for decades.
1) But its heartwarming to see US financiers buying up our local (Canadian) industries (Mining, auto production etc.) sales outlets (Wal-Mart, Costco) and service companies (KFC, Wendy's, Starbucks, movie theatre chains, TV programming) etc.
2) A large percentage of US oil (population 360, million approx.) is imported from the Middle East (e.g. Saudi Arabia) also being pumped from Gulf of Mexico. For example; we have a US son in law geologist who works in the oil industry and for the last ten years he has worked exclusivly within the USA!
Lets' have some balance of info. That's why we threw in the reference to whether hydro electricity is 'as green' as it is made out to be.
OK if you have off-peak rates; which make great sense by the way. By spreading the load. Some places in the UK for example they have (or had) heat storage heaters that used electrcity at night at a cheaper rate. The cheap rate switched off early in the morning as people got up, made breakfast, used electric trains and street cars to get to work, factories started up etc.
This talk about loads gets one thinking. Since 99% of homes and 100% of new ones here are electrically heated. And as it happens our island wide electrical sytem for a population of some half million persons is not connected to the North American grid. Any new domestic installations for last 30/40 years or more have required 200 amp services. Distribution transformer loadings (with anywhere from 3 to say 8 homes per transformer in suburban areas) must be installed on some sort of diversity. My heating won't be on simultaneously with all my neighbours, eh? I won't be cooking dinner, or taking a shower at exactly the same time etc. And in fact I will never be using all that
200 amps anyway? But if I were to plug in my 90 amp car recharger ...................... ! Hmmm!
As with any other big addition of power using equipment, you let the power Cc. know what you are doing (By getting a permit?) The transformer problem is then their responsibility. At least that was what I was told when I added a hot tub years ago.
Well I guess we'll soon find out how long it takes to build one based on this breaking news:
"President Obama traveled to Lanham, Md., today, to the headquarters of the IBEW Local 26, to announce that his administration plans to offer $8 billion in loan guarantees to build a new nuclear power facility. And more loan guarantees for clean energy are on the way.
In his remarks, Obama addressed safety and environmental concerns about nuclear energy:
Now, I know it has long been assumed that those who champion the environment are opposed to nuclear power. But the fact is, even though we have not broken ground on a new nuclear plant in nearly thirty years, nuclear energy remains our largest source of fuel that produces no carbon emissions. To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we'll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It's that simple. This one plant, for example, will cut carbon pollution by 16 million tons each year when compared to a similar coal plant. That's like taking 3.5 million cars off the road. "On an issue which affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we cannot continue to be mired in the same old debates between left and right; between environmentalists and entrepreneurs," he said. "
I'm actually quite surprised that he's finally backing up his prior statements about new nukes with some positive action. The real test will come when we see if there is any action to stop endless court and political challenges from the usual environmental extremists.
You're the first residential user that I ever heard of that notified the power company because they were installing a hot tub. In the rest of the residential world, no one is keeping track of what loads get added. You put in a 200amp service and that's the end of the story. If you need more capacity, THEN you call the electric company and upgrade to 300amps.
It puts me in awe of the power of gasoline when you consider that the equivalent POWER flow through an ordinary filling station hose at the gas station when you fill up your car is measured in MEGAWATTS!!!
Right now it's not an even comparison. But I think you'll all agree we're closer to the end of reasonably priced gas than we are from the beginning. No matter how much you think is left it's definitely a finite resource. On the other hand there are all sorts of potential new sources of electricity. Many that are of limited practicality right now have potential to become more practical either because of technology improvements or just volume increase. Most are "green" and do not add to the carbon dioxide load. Like it or not the days of gasoline powered transportation are numbered.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.