Only Tesla seems to think a vendor run charging network makes sense. Everyone else realises that charging has to come down to a common infrastructure, like every gas station being compatible with the tank filling port on every make of car. Where I live there are lots of places around the town to charge a car. For example, supermarket and retail park car parks mostly have a few charging points. I can't remember seeing a Tesla charger, though.Hmmm, and you discount the possibility of the network being a factor in Tesla outselling other BEVs?
You don't see the chargers because they aren't terribly obvious. The brown markers are superchargers, the green are Tesla outlets at destinations.
Unless they come up with a way to charge up the battery in 5 minutes - it's not gonna fly. In many countries the predominant form of housing are all sorts of apartament buildings, often without any form of garage (people just keep their cars parked on the street). So no charging overnight. Many companies do not have big parking lots, so people park on the streets too. No charging either. So they'd have to spend some hours every other day (depending on the commute distance) to wait for their car to charge up. No thanks. With battery powered tools, there are rechangeable batteries for that exact reason. To not put you in a position where u need to do something, but you have to wait for the damn thing to charge. Wealthy people will often live in a house or an apartement building with a parking spot, where they can charge their cars - that's true, but if it's supposed to be something that masses can use - no go.
Car's a tool. It's supposed to work.
meh. heard this before. Filling Station mentality. I won't make a change if I have to ANYTHING differently. The world is changing, get used to it.
Those 47 super chargers (you ignored the much larger number of tesla "wall" chargers) are sited to support long distance travel (near motorways) and charging at high speed. How many of those 4300 sites are similarly sited and have high speed charging? The point a lot of people are missing is that the Supercharger network is set up to make long distance EV travel work. I know in the US, long distance travel in any EV other than a Tesla is hard, if not impossible. Would be surprised if the the UK and continental Europe were different.
It's not that, but rather: I'm not gonna make a change if the result is less convenient and functional than the current way the things are done.
Progress is not assured, you have to make realistic plans and carry them forward without hopeful thinking.
If you try to use the state to force the poor into electric cars while the rich just use it as a second car and use fossil when convenient (very often once the novelty of value signalling is gone, plus the many rich who get a kick from signalling opulence). You're going to see a change you will not like.
I imagine that if internet forums existed 100 years ago, the exact same analagous debate, with analgous arguments one each side, would have occured on the topic “When will automobiles become mainstream”.
I imagine that if internet forums existed 100 years ago, the exact same analagous debate, with analgous arguments one each side, would have occured on the topic “When will automobiles become mainstream”.
It only took 2 years for New York city to be 99.999% horse driven to 99.9999% ICE. That was in 1912. People were tired walking though horse poop that could be 3 feet thick on some days. And any idea how much horse urine there was? 60, 000 gallons. If I'm not mistaken in 1920 New York on a daily bases had to deal with 2,500,000 pounds of horse poop. Average life expentancey of a working horse was three years. They would drop dead on the street and left to rot for days. Similar story every other city in the world.
Simiar story in London with the "Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894".
https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/
Haven't we already seen some cities ban smelly diesel trucks during certain hours so shoppers would not be exposed to diesel fumes?
Perhaps the bigger question is will people actually own cars in 50 years? Or will we have massive fleets of self driving Uber cars. All EVs, of course.
I imagine that if internet forums existed 100 years ago, the exact same analagous debate, with analgous arguments one each side, would have occured on the topic “When will automobiles become mainstream”.
It only took 2 years for New York city to be 99.999% horse driven to 99.9999% ICE. That was in 1912. People were tired walking though horse poop that could be 3 feet thick on some days. And any idea how much horse urine there was? 60, 000 gallons. If I'm not mistaken in 1920 New York on a daily bases had to deal with 2,500,000 pounds of horse poop. Average life expentancey of a working horse was three years. They would drop dead on the street and left to rot for days. Similar story every other city in the world.
Simiar story in London with the "Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894".
https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/
Haven't we already seen some cities ban smelly diesel trucks during certain hours so shoppers would not be exposed to diesel fumes?
Well in 1920, according to your numbers, there weren't very many horses in NYC. But your point about there being a tipping point with a high Q rings true.
But there was a lot of resistance to transitioning from horse to automobile throughout the US. Keeping a horse was labor intensive, it could only go so far before needing a rest, you had to feed it even if you didn't ride it and the manure needed to be dealt with on a regular basis. But even with all the benefits of auto ownership, people resisted. So, I don't find it surprising that people resist EVs.
Perhaps the bigger question is will people actually own cars in 50 years? Or will we have massive fleets of self driving Uber cars. All EVs, of course.
I think you are mixing up the confidence of a modern car with what a pain in the ass it was to own a car over 100 years ago. Remember 100 year ago customers had a choice between electric cars, Internal combustion engines and external combustion engines, steam). I believe the odds on favorite was ECE/steam as that was a trusted and proven technology at the time. Steam powered machines were wide spread use and ICE and electric were the new fangeled unproven technology. As oil was refined gasoline was considered a waste product and barrels of it were poured into streams to get rid of it.
Folks who could afford to purchase cars also had to employee a chauffeur/mechanic to keep the thing running. Cars then were very temperamental and were always in need of adjusting.
And let’s not forget there were no gas stations 100 years ago. If one needed gasoline they purchased it at a there local drug store.
Hmmm, what's your spark's WH per mile? doing the math (50KWh/600) I get 83 wh/mi. Seems kind of low, was expecting something in the 200-250 range.
Hmmm, what's your spark's WH per mile? doing the math (50KWh/600) I get 83 wh/mi. Seems kind of low, was expecting something in the 200-250 range.
Yah, that looks weird. Must be my home efficiency upgrades, my daughter moving out and a more efficient computer to read these blogs has skewed the data.
So I have car-charger only data from my kit built, OpenEVSE which records very accurate kWH. It works out to 233Wh/mile or 4.3mile/kWH, which better agrees with the cars onboard display of ~5mile/kWH(driving only, no charging).
thanks
Perhaps the bigger question is will people actually own cars in 50 years? Or will we have massive fleets of self driving Uber cars. All EVs, of course.
Or we'll be back to horses. I put the odds at 50/50 EVs versus Horses.
Its a pity that visible energy metering isn't a standard function in EV chargers. I think you'll find some kind of reasonably accurate power/energy monitoring in most of them, but its buried and only used to manage the load.
Self driving horses?
Self driving horses?
horses have pretty good self driving features and also automatic braking
and they can bring you home from pub even if you are a bag of potatoes
I think you are mixing up the confidence of a modern car with what a pain in the ass it was to own a car over 100 years ago. Remember 100 year ago customers had a choice between electric cars, Internal combustion engines and external combustion engines, steam). I believe the odds on favorite was ECE/steam as that was a trusted and proven technology at the time. Steam powered machines were wide spread use and ICE and electric were the new fangeled unproven technology. As oil was refined gasoline was considered a waste product and barrels of it were poured into streams to get rid of it.
Folks who could afford to purchase cars also had to employee a chauffeur/mechanic to keep the thing running. Cars then were very temperamental and were always in need of adjusting.
And let’s not forget there were no gas stations 100 years ago. If one needed gasoline they purchased it at a there local drug store.I don't think so.
While really early ICE cars were the province of the rich or tinkerers, the Model T was a breakthrough, especially with the introduction of the electric starter in 1919. It was inexpensive, relatively reliable and easy to fix. They "flew off the shelves" - there was huge demand. In 1920 Ford cut the price to $395 and sold 1.4M of them. Cumulative number of Model Ts sold from 1909 through 1920 was 4.6M. The population of the US at that time was a bit more than 100M. There were about 23M families at that point - almost 1 family in 5 had a Ford Model T.
Steam was a problem because you had to fire it up well before you left whereas the ICEs of the day, with an electric starter, took just a few minutes to get ready. While steam autos may have out numbered ICE autos early on, it was on very small numbers. Wikipedia says: In the U.S. in 1902, 485 of 909 new car registrations were steamers. However, by 1910 only a handful of steamer companies were left. One of which was Stanley - Wikipedia says: Production rose to 500 cars in 1917. Ford that same year: 375K. White was probably the leading manufacturer and built a total of about 10K, ending production in 1912.
Electric was a non-starter due to poor battery capacity and weight . Also limited electrification restricted where they could go - in 1921, a little more than half the population of the US had electricity.