Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

When the b/s oil control war is over, what will all the people who flocked to EV's be left with in the aftermath?

Trump's stupidity is affecting a lot of things, including his chance of being dumped at the mid-term elections.

Currently, the mad rush to get EV's is driven by only one thing - perceived cost. But the TCOO (Total Cost Of Ownership) value proposition is not really any different except in the very short term (no more than a few years).

The cost of electricity is rising. The rules/regulations around non-EV's are evolving. It's rapidly approaching that per-km road user charging to replace fuel taxation is coming (here in Australia at least), and the narrative around 'command/control' of modern vehicles (of which EV's lead the charge being basically appliances on wheels) keeps developing.
Top | New | Old
Docdon23 · M
I have solar panels on my roof and do not pay anything for electricity, and have an EV, which I had before the trunp nonsense...
swirlie · 31-35, F
@zonavar68
Even if you have no trees around your house AND you could afford all the solar paraphernalia that is required to go totally off the grid, you will NOT achieve a net gain over using grid energy, assuming the wires are running right past your front door and you can tap into the grid by making a simple phone call to your local utility provider.

At the end of the day or more importantly, at the end of the year ..or 10 year average for that matter, you will be no further ahead financially by having your own solar powered electrical system on your roof, than remaining tapped into the grid and paying a monthly electrical usage bill.

Going solar amounts to a break-even situation in all cases over any given length of time, break-even meaning with what you'd otherwise pay using grid energy.

The only time that a self-contained, off-the-grid solar application has any merit, is if your house is located in an area that is not serviced by grid energy at all because you live in the middle of nowhere and you're the only one out there.

In that particular case only, is solar panels and batteries etc, the only option you have if you don't want to live in total darkness, with the other option being to own a fossil fuel powered generator to power your home 24/7 and filling up the propane or diesel tank once a month.

To live in or near suburbia and yet insist on having solar panels on your asphalt shingled roof ..and thinking that you're living off the grid and getting free power to light your home and recharge your EV in the garage, is nothing short of a delusional perception of your own financial reality. But I know that you already know that!
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@swirlie I have a single phase 100 amp rated 240 VAC grid power connection to the house. The daily charge for having grid power is a significant component of the quarterly bills

It's proposed to put that charge up quite a lot (it's currently about $1.30 per day) and this is a direct result of the changes required to move away from large single-point sources (power stations transforming energy in bulk and highly efficiently to electricity) to having lots of vastly inefficient wind, solar and micro-solar sources feeding the grid with a huge number of B.E.S.S installations that are in the bigger picture grossly expensive and have to be there to compensate for loss of 'grid inertia' (AC frequency and power factor stablisation). The grid will be a lot more spread out and disjointed as the shift to so-called renewables replaces traditional highly efficient power stations.

This will get a lot worse if EV uptake rises massively and the grid power demands just for vehicle charging will go up many orders of magnitude of what the current grid capacity (starting from the points where energy is transformed to electricity) is now.

People also forget that solar panels themselves never get more than about 20 pct efficient and the remaining 80 percent of light energy they collect is immediately lost as heat.
swirlie · 31-35, F
@zonavar68
Very informative and thanks for all that!

That would then explain why such a huge initiative is being undertaken right now here in Canada to construct what they call "mini-nuclear reactors" which do nothing but generate electricity for the grid up here.

These min-reactors sit among population centers and are about the size of a backyard storage shed (8'x8'x8') and are ascetically pleasing to the eye.

What they do however is make power without wiping out all civilization around them IF they happen to meltdown for some reason (if meltdown is even possible).

I was reading that they are primarily located along the 49th Parallel to not only supply all of Canada's needs, but also to supply 99% of the US power requirement. The reason for this is that the USA is technically bankrupt and has zero money available for infrastructure upgrade or replacement.

Canada (particularly the Province of Ontario) has been selling nuclear-generated and hydro-generated power to the US for many years now. This apparently is Canada's answer to EV demand that is looming in the near-distance, rather than using wind farms and solar installations located in open fields (for the reasons of inefficiency you describe).

Canada is going huge on EV production involving Asian car manufacturers building production plants here, as well as becoming the primary maker of replacement car batteries for all EV vehicles worldwide.

Canada has the largest rare earth deposits of lithium in the world (which is why the US wanted to annex Canada, because the US as little to no natural resources, including crude oil) and those deposits are only a truck-ride to the battery factories now being built in southern Ontario ..along the 49th Parallel as well!
Baremine · 70-79, C
My shingles are asphalt. But I believe they are fiberglass.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Has Trump's war really created a big rise in EV sales, in Australia anyway?

In the UK the matter of some way of replacing the expected dwindling of liquid fuel Duty + VAT has been around for a long time now, with no definite decision; but such replacement will have to be inevitable.

I do not and likely will never own an EV but a friend who does told me if you have a proper charger installed at home it has to be fed via its own meter, separately from the normal household electricity meter; and I do wonder if that is so the car's electricity can be taxed in a somewhat similar way to petrol and Diesel-oil.

The matter of control, especially remote control, keeps simmering away. Personally I am not convinced by some of the wilder claims but I do know there are serious voices from people far more knowledgable than me, and professionallyso, about security especially of cars manufactured in China.

Even without that too many manufacturers seem to be fitting even what we might regard as simple engineering functions like seat controls and air-conditioning with "subscriptions" and control by 'phone. That though, is a pure financial scam, and not confined to electric cars.
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@ArishMell These are the current stats by drivetrain type. You will see that of *registered* vehicles (not pure sales to dealers that aren't yet sold to end-users), EV's are only 2.4 percent.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@zonavar68 Thankyou. Hard to pin down single factors just on those figures alone, but one does seem to be the types of vehicle available. Obviously the dealers will themselves buy what they know their customers want but the variety and ranges of the various battery and hybrid vehicles are increasing.

Well, variety for the moment. China is going all-out to destroy other countries' motor industries so it gains a monopoly likely only to lead to much smaller choices of a very few apparent makes.


By "exponential", I wonder what they mean? All too often the term is used merely to mean "rapid", which of course is completely wrong. It can be rapid and exponential, but by co-incidence not definition; and can describe decay or growth. So I'm always wary of the term.

Nevertheless, it does show overall a general drift away from purely internal-combustion engines. After all, the concept of electric cars of reasonable choice, range and capital cost for most motorists able to buy new, is still fairly young so we can't expect enormous sales quite yet.



One factor in the choice of liquid fuels is their relative cost in the country concerned.

For decades Diesel was much cheaper than petrol in the UK, until fears about the health problems from exhaust soot and nitrous-oxides encouraged a governmental about-turn, raising the tax on the compression-ignition fuel so it became a bit more expensive than petrol. Though it was probably still more economical than petrol to buy, by the engines' innate higher thermodynamic efficiency.

The manufacturers responded to this and wider environmental legislation by making the Diesel engine more efficient still and far cleaner - though the fact of this, and the method, seems incomprehensible to most politicians, journalists and certainly the most strident "green" campaigners. The last may be sincere but often seem ignorant even of the differences between fuel, energy and power.

UK sales of electric cars are increasing, slowly but at increasing rate helped more by China than America, and the present problems in the world may boost this.

Though we still have the problem those same politicians etc, also find incomprehensible, that at least a third of British motorists would need rely on public chargers, of which there can never be enough for universal demand.


No-one of course could have foreseen the present situation, due to two illegal wars and the growing threats in the Red Sea. These have distorted the UK retail fuel market by pushing up the prices, but disproportionately increading the gap between petrol and higher Diesel costs.

This even without, so far, Trump's proposal to ban US exports of Diesel-oil to try to hold down US fuel price rises he caused, ahead of their Mid-Term Election.

(I think that ban could rebound, by making the oil companies in the USA increase their domestic prices to compensate for the lost export revenue. Alternatively, I suppose they might cut the domestic retail costs drastically, to encourage sheer waste to both recoup the export loss and to reduce manufcaturing and storage difficulties.)


It's awful that so many hundreds of millions of people in so many countries are being affected, badly, by just a few men: a few nations' bellicose presidents and their cliques.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
The cost savings despite the need for the age
BlueVeins · 26-30
Dont assume the strait will be reopened long term. And dont assume this will be the last war.

 
Post Comment