More EV fires after salt water flooding

[jtr1962]

But he is in SF, have him move to NY, or other not so warm regions, and see how much his solar will make in a winter, with short daylight.

I did the numbers a few years ago. Just panels on our garage roof will be enough to cover our annual electric usage (around 6,000 kW-hr). Payback would be about 2 years if I installed them myself, about 4 if I had someone do it for me. If we went to electric heat pump heating, then we would also need to do the south facing part of the home roof. Or just wait until the 40% efficient panels hit the market if I just want to keep them on the garage roof only.

This myth of sustainable renewable energy has been debunked by a simple calculator, that is not even considering that jets and ships still use oil for fuel, more in one day than all cars use a year. And we need them to bring all those "free' batteries from china along with other crap that we no longer make in USA,

So because we can't solve 100% of the problem right away we don't chip away at it bit by bit? Motor vehicles are a big use of fossil fuels. Power generation is another big use. Both those things can be taken off fossil fuels. Fission, solar, wind, hydro, and eventually fusion offer that path.

We can tackle jets and ships by first drastically reducing their use. Start making our own stuff instead of buying from China. That cuts the amount of shipping. As for jets, that's way easier. Most flying is a want, not a need. We can substantially reduce the amount people fly by heavily taxing air travel in line with what its pollution costs.

Then there's just good, old-fashioned conservation. I'm probably keeping my oil heat system off this winter because I'm tired of paying $3K or more just to heat the house. It's a rip-off. I just need a space heater in whatever room my mother is in. The rest of the house will hold about 20°F above average outdoor temps on its own. So worst case it might get down to 35° or 40°, and that's only on unusually cold days. Regular winter days, maybe mid 50s. That's fine. I'll just put on more clothes and use an electric heating pad on my bed when I sleep. Over the winter, the extra electric usage will probably only be a few hundred dollars for the space heater and electric pad.

New homes can offer greater energy savings if built correctly. We can super-insulate a home so the heat from a candle is enough to make it comfortable on the coldest days.

 

[jtr1962]

SO what if they have 10 billions, that is a good thing, can you see beyond that "environmental programming"?, like that money are put into economy, hundreds of different industries exist, and millions have jobs.

It's bad for the end user to pay so much money for energy. Energy should be like any other good. Buy the ability to make it once, then use it indefinitely. That's how solar works. Buy the panels. In a few years you break even. After that it's free energy. Why should we give an income stream to giant corporations? That same money could be spent elsewhere, creating as many or more jobs.

I'd like to see people offered more things which let them live more cheaply. That's why I never owned a car. I shouldn't have to spend an income stream just to get around. I like to either just pay a fare only when I use it, or buy a vehicle which doesn't cost me anything beyond the purchase price, plus very occasional maintenance, like a bicycle.

It's not "good" having giant corporations make money off the backs of working people. That's reverse Marxism-money going from the poor/middle class to the wealthy.

 

[alpg88]

Panels, on an average house will give you about 6000-8000w, in best case, that is rated power, not considering inverter loses, average house service 2 phases 200amps, 48000w, average fridge needs 1500w, a hair dryer 1800w, tesla fast charger needs on average 20000W. an oven uses about 3000w, heat pump uses about 5000w.
You can not run your house on solar panels alone. not with what you have on the roof.

 

[alpg88]

It's bad for the end user to pay so much money for energy. Energy should be like any other good. Buy the ability to make it once, then use it indefinitely.

LOL, that is nonsense, energy is a consumable product. just like food and water, we buy we consume, then we buy more,

 

[jtr1962]

LOL, that is nonsense, energy is a consumable product. just like food and water, we buy we consume, then we buy more,

Except it doesn't have to be like that if you buy the means to generate the energy, instead of letting someone else generate it for you. Using your analogy, what if you have a well and grow or hunt your own food? You're eating and drinking without being beholden to a stupid corporation.

Corporate America is trying its level best to get income streams for more and more stuff. The latest example is renting software, instead of buying it outright. It has to stop. I want what's best for the average person, not the shareholders or executives of a big corporation.

 

[alpg88]

Except it doesn't have to be like that if you buy the means to generate the energy, instead of letting someone else generate it for you.

Now you getting into politics, I agree, you should be, but this is not how gvmnt works, living off grid is like a crime, not just in USA, all over the world basically, in some states and countries you can not even collect a rainwater.
In any case, we are not talking hypothetical things, but very real, reality is you can not power your house with only solar on your roof, unless your roof area is an acre. however if you had to buy all those panels yourself, it would be cost prohibitive, you'd be better off paying someone for power and not worry about their life span, maintenance, equipment involved.......

However, do not look at yourself as a victim of gvmnt and corporate greed, software developers, want to make 6 figures, and have their jobs for decades, in order to do that they, or companies, need to sell licenses, and rent their product, this is how thousands of developers can live in nice houses, drive their teslas, and live well, electricians who work on power plants and power companies who run cables, and maintain the grid, they also need to get paid, good portion of them get 6 figures too, companies need to sell products, collect payments in order to pay their workers, same for every industry. Whatever you do for a living most likely is dependent on this concept, and do not let me get started on stocks, they would not exist in a world of your "should be". but it is a huge chunk of income for many people. including those who complain about evil capitalists,.

 

[jtr1962]

In any case, we are not talking hypothetical things, but very real, reality is you can not power your house with only solar on your roof, unless your roof area is an acre.

I ran the numbers and I most certainly can. If you have crazy high average usage like 4,000 kW-hr a month then of course it's not possible with an average roof. The first step to using renewables is to cut your usage as much as possible. Really, that's a good idea regardless of whether you have solar or not. It saves you money.

We shouldn't have laws keeping people from living independently of giant corporations. I'd actually love to see a Mr. Fusion™ one day which you buy once to provide all the heat and electricity you'll ever need.

If you have battery-backed solar you can definitely disconnect from the grid. In fact, since power companies are cooling to the idea of net metering battery backup might soon be the only feasible way to go solar.

 

[alpg88]

well, that is not happening any time soon, not under gvmnts that we have today, and i'm not just talking usa, you may be able to get Mr. fusion, but you'd have to lease it,
btw average house uses 30kwh a day,

 

[jtr1962]

btw average house uses 30kwh a day,

That seems like a lot. When I'm not heating or cooling, I use about 10 kW-hr a day. That's with me and my mother home all the time, the living room TV on about 14 hours a day, my PC on all the time (except the monitor). If it were just me, my daily use, exclusive of heating/cooling, would be around 6 or 7 kW-hr/day. Probably 2 kW-hr a day of that is for the fridge.

 

[alpg88]

well I do not have an electric bill so I have no idea what I use, but the google says;\

Home Size	Average House kWh per Day and Month
Average kWh usage for 1,000 sq. ft home	32 kWh per day, 950 kWh per month
Average kWh usage for 1,500 sq. ft home	37 kWh per day, 1,100 kWh per month
Average kWh usage for 2,000 sq. ft home	43 kWh per day, 1,300 kWh per month

 

[jtr1962]

well I do not have an electric bill so I have no idea what I use, but the google says;\

Home Size	Average House kWh per Day and Month
Average kWh usage for 1,000 sq. ft home	32 kWh per day, 950 kWh per month
Average kWh usage for 1,500 sq. ft home	37 kWh per day, 1,100 kWh per month
Average kWh usage for 2,000 sq. ft home	43 kWh per day, 1,300 kWh per month

Ouch. Even in the summers we rarely go much above 700 kW-hr per month. House is about 850 square feet not including the finished basement. If I found a way to insulate much better we might be under 500 kW-hr/month even in summers (and winter we probably would need little or no artificial heating).

 

[Kestrel]

Another option is to refuse to be dragged down to "average".

1750 sq feet house, plus two-car attached garage
Electric cookstove but natural gas for water heating, furnace, and clothes dryer.
Average weekday usage: 4-5 kWh
Average weekend daily usage: 7 KWh (due to cooking food for the week)

i.e. less than 200 kWh per month.

Jeez, if I was drinking down that ~40 kWh daily average, I guess I would also be b******g about how solar couldn't cover my usage either, lol.

Edit: But yes, since Natural Gas is the new bad actor from what we're being told , let's just get rid of that as well. :-/

 

[jtr1962]

Another option is to refuse to be dragged down to "average".

1750 sq feet house
Electric cookstove but natural gas for water heating, furnace, and clothes dryer.
Average weekday usage: 4-5 kWh
Average weekend daily usage: 7 KWh (due to cooking food for the week)

i.e. less than 200 kWh per month.

Jeez, if I was drinking down that ~40 kWh daily average, I guess I would also be b******g about how solar couldn't cover my usage either, lol.

I thought I was doing good but you make me look like an energy hog!

Edit: But yes, since Natural Gas is the new bad actor from what we're being told , let's just get rid of that as well. :-/

Not a bad actor but it's not saving people money these days. A therm of natural gas has about 29.3 kW-hr. A gallon of home heating oil has around 40.6 kW-hr. Where I live a therm costs around $6.50, including all taxes and delivery charges. A gallon of home heating oil is roughly $5.50 to $7.00. Natural gas then comes to about $0.22/kW-hr, while heating oil is $0.135 to $0.175 per kW-hr. Using a heat pump with a COP of 3 at current electric prices would come to around $0.11/kW-hr. The heat pump is obviously the cleanest source while oil is the dirtiest. It's also the least expensive.

 

[Kestrel]

I do have two chest freezers running (better go catch them), but am trying to consolidate to one ... :-/

 

[alpg88]

Not a bad actor but it's not saving people money these days.

Who said that? gvmnt? every time gvmnt wants to save our money, it ends up costing us much more, whenever they make streets safer crime skyrockets,............etc.

let the market sort it out, if electricity is cheaper people will switch with no mandates, and bans

 

[IMA SOL MAN]

Kansas county bans commercial wind, some solar projects

Photo by Lacey Newlin HARVEY COUNTY —The Harvey County Commission appr

hayspost.com

 

[jtr1962]

What's the rationale behind that? The same people would probably go ballistic if government banned oil or gas but now it's OK to ban solar or wind?

 

[jtr1962]

let the market sort it out, if electricity is cheaper people will switch with no mandates, and bans

Sounds good until you realize under our system those vested in the status quo will always continue to fight any change which gives them less power or money. Look at the huge uphill battle it was to get people to stop smoking, as an example. And that's something which is completely optional. It's even harder to get change when you're talking things people need, like energy or transportation. Oil companies knew about climate change at least 40 years ago but put a lid on it. They did the same spreading FUD about electric vehicles. Those with a vested interest lobbied against public transit. Just because something new might actually be better is no guarantee it'll succeed in a free market. This is exactly why we have mandates and subsidies.

 

[alpg88]

They do not spread anything about electric vehicles, (fud, sounds like another liberal label for people who do not like to be told how to live.) i have nothing against electrics, but people who live in apartments can not charge them, nor they are cheap, cheapest tesla 3 is like 50 grand, it is the size of Honda civic, for 25 you can get an accord, which is much roomier.

 

[jtr1962]

They do not spread anything about electric vehicles, (fud, sounds like another liberal label for people who do not like to be told how to live.) i have nothing against electrics, but people who live in apartments can not charge them, nor they are cheap, cheapest tesla 3 is like 50 grand, it is the size of Honda civic, for 25 you can get an accord, which is much roomier.

Any new product always caters to the luxury market first. Why should EVs be any different? That's starting to change. Tesla is coming out with a $25K EV. That's before subsidies. And this one is $12,500 after subsidies. The real game changer though will be the sub $10K EVs. With Tesla finding ways to make cars less expensively, I'm sure it'll happen in the next few years. If not Tesla, then China. We could already make cars cheaper if got rid some of the BS crash standards, especially stuff like rollover protection. History has shown stuff like that, anti-lock brakes, etc. doesn't make driving safer. It just adds to the cost of vehicles. Drivers eventually compensate for it feeling safe doing things they wouldn't have felt safe doing in their last vehicle.

I totally get that EVs just don't work for some use cases. However, in places where lots of people live in apartments, many don't even own cars. Many of those who do only use them on weekends. The most bang for the buck in places like NYC is electrifying fleet vehicles. Amazon is already doing this. USPS ordered a bunch of electric trucks. We're mandating that for-hire vehicles in NYC be zero emissions by a certain date. The city is also slowly electrifying its bus fleet and police fleet. This probably tackles 80% or more of the pollution issues and much of the noise problem. Moreover, commercial/government aren't doing this because they love Greta Thunberg. They actually save lots of money by fleet electrification.

You want to know a potential big win in this game? Going after the hypocritical rich people preaching climate change who have a greater CO2 footprint in one day than I have in my entire life. And it looks like it might be gaining traction:

New Englanders are fighting against new infrastructure for carbon-intensive billionaire travel.

I somehow doubt most of the voting population cares if we make things harder for private jets or helicopters. Most will never use either, much less on a regular basis.