Tesla has been FAKING range estimates...

Jan Panteltje · Aug 28, 2023

On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:53:19 +0200) it happened jeroen
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubctig$28l9g$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 06:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants
https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/
[...]

What nonsense is this??? *Micro$oft* finds vulnerabilities in other vendor\'s
software? Let them clean out their own stable first!

Besides, the so-called vulnerabilities can only be exploited once the hacker
has successfully authenticated. Small wonder!

You never hacked anything I presume?

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 6:46:33â¯PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 21:34:49 -0700 (PDT), Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 12:13:36?AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in <c05fa772-78a1-4e59...@googlegroups.com>:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:48:08?PM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 19:15:49 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in <6e185254-8feb-448a...@googlegroups.com>:

<snip>

BTW, why is the Netherlands a third world country when it comes to providing electricity?
What is holding them back this time?

We are way ahead adding charging points,
it does suck on infrastructure.

That\'s mainly the Dutch habit of being financially responsible. They don\'t like investing money in infrastructure that they can\'t get people to pay for using immediately.

Only if you want people to charge at electricity peak use times. It would be very backwards thinking to promote that.

The other problem is all the solar panels being added that feed back into the grid
the system was never designed for that.

Which is not related to BEVs.

Most wiring is underground here, only HV lines are over ground.

Takes a while to dig it all up I suppose.

You don\'t have to dig it up - just dig more trenches for new lines.

> >Why on earth are you stuck in the idea of digging up your perfectly good power lines? Yes, I can see why the electric grid in the Netherlands is like a third world country.

Not remotely. It is a small and densely populated country, so you don\'t need long runs of distribution cable, but you do have a lot people who don\'t want to have to look at an overhead power cable, and it\'s rich enough to make it practical to bury most of them

As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants
https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/

You do tend to have problems with sticking to a topic of discussion.

Better get a big tank with fuel in case disaster happens and a decent diesel to escape the area

What will you do then? There won\'t be gas or diesel stations to fuel your vehicles.

None of the electric systems will work in your car, all them 1 Ohm resistors fused ;-)...
when that high altitude nuke triggers.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/electromagnetic-pulse-from-a-nuclear-bomb-probably-wont-fry-your-quartz-watch
so your digital watch may survive!
Well it would likely be noon anyways on the doomsday clock.

Yeah, you are right. But I put an aluminum foil hat on my BEVs, so I\'ll be ok.

Thanks for the conversation. It\'s always interesting to visit the nut house.

You seem to be constantly tub-thumping for the EV industry and have
been for quite a while now. Do you have an undeclared interest here?

Do you own Tesla stock or something? Nothing to be gained in berating
and insulting others for your own poor investment decisions. You backed a loser, pal.

He has boasted about how well that investment paid off.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TSLA/tesla/stock-price-history

It\'s currently below it\'s peak, but pretty healthy. The peak at the end of 2021 was a bit silly, but they are still selling a lot of cars. I see a couple every day.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

jeroen · Aug 28, 2023

On 2023-08-14 12:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:53:19 +0200) it happened jeroen
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubctig$28l9g$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 06:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants
https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/
[...]

What nonsense is this??? *Micro$oft* finds vulnerabilities in other vendor\'s
software? Let them clean out their own stable first!

Besides, the so-called vulnerabilities can only be exploited once the hacker
has successfully authenticated. Small wonder!

You never hacked anything I presume?

Sure, I\'m not claiming these systems are perfect and inviolable.
Anything can be sabotaged by a sufficiently determined actor.
I was just tickled by the incongruity of the makers of world\'s
least reliable software criticizing the software of industrial
controllers, which are mostly pretty reliable. And *of course*,
once you get access to such a device, you can do anything to it.
That seems to me evident!

I could probably crash the LHC without getting off my chair, if
I wanted to.

Jeroen Belleman

Jan Panteltje · Aug 28, 2023

On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:04:21 +0200) it happened jeroen
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubdc9a$2boh6$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 12:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:53:19 +0200) it happened jeroen
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubctig$28l9g$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 06:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants

https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/
[...]

What nonsense is this??? *Micro$oft* finds vulnerabilities in other vendor\'s
software? Let them clean out their own stable first!

Besides, the so-called vulnerabilities can only be exploited once the hacker
has successfully authenticated. Small wonder!

You never hacked anything I presume?

Sure, I\'m not claiming these systems are perfect and inviolable.
Anything can be sabotaged by a sufficiently determined actor.
I was just tickled by the incongruity of the makers of world\'s
least reliable software criticizing the software of industrial
controllers, which are mostly pretty reliable. And *of course*,
once you get access to such a device, you can do anything to it.
That seems to me evident!

I could probably crash the LHC without getting off my chair, if
I wanted to.

Yes, all it needs is motivation.
I hacked things from pay-tv to my Chinese drone, to what not..
Had some help... Some Linux library developers were pissed...
for pay-tv alt.satellite.tv.crypt was the meeting place.
I stopped, politicians got upset, was not worth the jail time.. many that kept going got arrested...

Nothing is 100% secure, we now even know the US launch codes are all zeros
as it would be too difficult for them poor soldiers to remember more complex numbers in a stress situation.
Ask google
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_action_link
quote:
\"According to nuclear safety expert Bruce G. Blair,
the US Air Force\'s Strategic Air Command worried that in times of need the codes for the Minuteman ICBM force would not be available,
so it decided to set the codes to 00000000 in all missile launch control centers\"
Me: >>>they probably changed it to all nines now ;-)
In the drone case I found a test point that had a signal that looked a lot like a serial 8 bit one.. it was.
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html

As to CERN, I think I only need to swap a few cables to make them see a FTL particle (again):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly

Google can be a great help for hacking.
Think I have been hacking since I was a kid...

Ricky · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:46:33â¯AM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 21:34:49 -0700 (PDT), Ricky
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 12:13:36?AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
c05fa772-78a1-4e59...@googlegroups.com>:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:48:08?PM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrot> >> >e:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 19:15:49 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Flyguy=

soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in
6e185254-8feb-448a...@googlegroups.com>:
The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 c=
hargers as I already pointed out in a previous post.
Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance tha=
t part of the grid.
Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
+1

Here in the Netherlands the grid is already so much overloaded that in some places new companies that need lots of power
cannot even get a net connection.
We have plans for 2 new nuclear power plants, that will take time.
Rebuilding electrical infrastructure will take time too.
Keeping some vehicles powered by gasoline or whatever for emergency services is, in my view, a must.
Else one hacker, one strong solar eruption, one high altitude nuke and you country is dead...
Redundancy is a good thing.
Climate WILL change, we need all the power generating systems we can get online to cope with that.
The CO2 fear snake oil polar bear counting snake oil selling salesmen are a danger to humanity.

So, if you plug in your BEV and set it to charge from midnight to 6 AM, it will bring down the grid?

Why can\'t you be rational about this???
Try reading the ieee.org links above,

I did, and I had responses to them, which you seem to be ignoring.

BTW, why is the Netherlands a third world country when it comes to providing electricity?
What is holding them back this time?
We are way ahead adding charging points,

\"Ahead\" of what???

it does suck on infrastructure.

Only if you want people to charge at electricity peak use times. It would be very backwards thinking to promote that.

The other problem is all the solar panels being added that feed back into the grid
the system was never designed for that.

Which is not related to BEVs.

Most wiring is underground here, only HV lines are over ground.
Takes a while to dig it all up I suppose.

Why on earth are you stuck in the idea of digging up your perfectly good power lines? Yes, I can see why the electric grid in the Netherlands is like a third world country.

As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants
https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/

You do tend to have problems with sticking to a topic of discussion.

Better get a big tank with fuel in case disaster happens and a decent diesel to escape the area

What will you do then? There won\'t be gas or diesel stations to fuel your vehicles.

None of the electric systems will work in your car, all them 1 Ohm resistors fused ;-)...
when that high altitude nuke triggers.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/electromagnetic-pulse-from-a-nuclear-bomb-probably-wont-fry-your-quartz-watch
so your digital watch may survive!
Well it would likely be noon anyways on the doomsday clock.

Yeah, you are right. But I put an aluminum foil hat on my BEVs, so I\'ll be ok.

Thanks for the conversation. It\'s always interesting to visit the nut house.
You seem to be constantly tub-thumping for the EV industry and have
been for quite a while now. Do you have an undeclared interest here?
Do you own Tesla stock or something? Nothing to be gained in berating
and insulting others for your own poor investment decisions. You
backed a loser, pal.

The only people who think I am \"tub thumping\" are those who can\'t understand what I\'m saying.

Why are you here? Why don\'t you have anything useful to say. I\'m happy to discuss the facts. Jan is a lunatic who will literally bring anything into a conversation. You seem to believe anything you read, as long as it\'s nonsense.

What\'s wrong with discussing real facts?

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 1:29:03â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:46:33â¯AM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 21:34:49 -0700 (PDT), Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 12:13:36?AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in <c05fa772-78a1-4e59...@googlegroups.com>:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:48:08?PM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 19:15:49 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in <6e185254-8feb-448a...@googlegroups..com>:

You seem to be constantly tub-thumping for the EV industry and have
been for quite a while now. Do you have an undeclared interest here?
Do you own Tesla stock or something? Nothing to be gained in berating
and insulting others for your own poor investment decisions. You
backed a loser, pal.

The only people who think I am \"tub thumping\" are those who can\'t understand what I\'m saying.

Why are you here? Why don\'t you have anything useful to say. I\'m happy to discuss the facts. Jan is a lunatic who will literally bring anything into a conversation. You seem to believe anything you read, as long as it\'s nonsense.

What\'s wrong with discussing real facts?

Cursitor Doom doesn\'t like them. They get complicated, and sorting them out takes judgement, which he hasn\'t got. He\'s the archetypal whinging Pom, who got educated into thinking himself superior, and can\'t learn to accept that he isn\'t remotely superior or even worth paying attention to.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Flyguy · Aug 28, 2023

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers.
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

It\'s rather funny that anyone things an automaker is \"switching\" back to ICE. Everyone is converting to BEVs as fast as they can ramp up. It\'s just that some automakers don\'t make cars that are as good as other brands, regardless of the hype.

Its more complicated than it might seem.. For example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66172158
John

Yes, they have obviously done their sums and worked out that the EV
revolution will take decades, despite all the hype, so are hedging
their bets on ICE being around for a long time yet.

The media are at last starting to wake up to the fact that the net
zero thing isn\'t going to happen any time soon. Why ?: Because it\'s
targets are not deliverable. The ex CEO of UK National Grid in
the press, DT, from memory, saying that the required infrastructure,
generation, network, substations and individual properties will all
need a major upgrade, costing anything up to a trillion and taking
20-30 years to get in place.
That is probably true for the UK. But, in countries with first world infrastructure, it will require relatively little investment in the grid. Mostly it will just be the addition of 30A, 240V charge points, which can already be accommodated in the vast majority of homes.

I get that you don\'t know much about the topic, because you clearly, have never looked at it from a realistic perspective. Once you stop promoting all the hype, and look at the issues realistically, you will see BEVs are immensely practical and a significant advancement over ICE vehicles.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
That is, simply, not true. The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 chargers as I already pointed out in a previous post. Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance that part of the grid. Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
Against my better judgement I will discuss this with you. But as soon as you start getting offensive and not discussing the facts, I will no longer respond.

From the first link, âThere are places even today [in the city] where we canât even take one more heat pump without having to rebuild the portion of the [electrical distribution] system. Or we canât even have one EV charger go in.â and immediately after that, \"Peak loading is the primary concern.\"

These two statements do not necessarily go together. The first statement is from Tomm Marshall, assistant director of utilities. He talks as if charging BEVs is exactly the same as adding another heat pump. Well, that may be true in terms of the way they treat such devices in the code. But, there\'s no reason for that.
He didn\'t say they went together, but they might. A friend of mine lives in Palo Alto and they wanted to put in another heat pump. This required an electrical upgrade that took over a YEAR to get approved. The same would go for an L2 charger.
And that is exactly the point. The code is what needs to be modified, not the grid. Did you not follow the reasoning?
BEVs have a great deal of flexibility in *when* they are charged. A very large majority of BEVs come home each day, only needing a few kWh of charge being added. The average daily drive in the US is around 40 miles, which is 10 kWh in most BEVs. That can be done from a 120V, 15A outlet overnight, presenting virtually an unnoticed additional load. The only upgrade to anything is the use of the charging timers already available in most BEVs and the federal mandate they be included in all new BEVs. Problem solved!
This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.

Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.

The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.
You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.
Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.

This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.

> > > This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.

Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf

https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â
Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.

Evening means when the sun is down.

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â
Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.

Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.
You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.
Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.

Of course they do - they want to meet there customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.
I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?

Now, yes, but not by 2035.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.

Read the references provided.

--

Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

jeroen · Aug 28, 2023

On 2023-08-14 17:20, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:04:21 +0200) it happened jeroen
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubdc9a$2boh6$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 12:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:53:19 +0200) it happened jeroen
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ubctig$28l9g$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2023-08-14 06:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Aug 2023 20:06:56 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
As to the dangers to all your infrastructure:
Microsoft finds vulnerabilities it says could be used to shut down power plants

https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/microsoft-finds-vulnerabilities-it-says-could-be-used-to-shut-down-power-plants/
[...]

What nonsense is this??? *Micro$oft* finds vulnerabilities in other vendor\'s
software? Let them clean out their own stable first!

Besides, the so-called vulnerabilities can only be exploited once the hacker
has successfully authenticated. Small wonder!

You never hacked anything I presume?

Sure, I\'m not claiming these systems are perfect and inviolable.
Anything can be sabotaged by a sufficiently determined actor.
I was just tickled by the incongruity of the makers of world\'s
least reliable software criticizing the software of industrial
controllers, which are mostly pretty reliable. And *of course*,
once you get access to such a device, you can do anything to it.
That seems to me evident!

I could probably crash the LHC without getting off my chair, if
I wanted to.

Yes, all it needs is motivation.
I hacked things from pay-tv to my Chinese drone, to what not..
Had some help... Some Linux library developers were pissed...
for pay-tv alt.satellite.tv.crypt was the meeting place.
I stopped, politicians got upset, was not worth the jail time.. many that kept going got arrested...

Nothing is 100% secure, we now even know the US launch codes are all zeros
as it would be too difficult for them poor soldiers to remember more complex numbers in a stress situation.
Ask google
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_action_link
quote:
\"According to nuclear safety expert Bruce G. Blair,
the US Air Force\'s Strategic Air Command worried that in times of need the codes for the Minuteman ICBM force would not be available,
so it decided to set the codes to 00000000 in all missile launch control centers\"
Me: >>>they probably changed it to all nines now ;-)
In the drone case I found a test point that had a signal that looked a lot like a serial 8 bit one.. it was.
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html

As to CERN, I think I only need to swap a few cables to make them see a FTL particle (again):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly

Yes, I remember that one. Rule Nr.1: When something seems to go FTL, check
your equipment. (And until then, keep quiet!) It\'s easy to get something
wrong. Both CNGS at CERN and Gran Sasso in Italy are deep underground
and the path of the timing for both is long and convoluted.

I happened to be guiding a busload of kids to some installations that
night and they were all excited about this new \'discovery\'. I said
it just *had* to be an error, and in the end, it was.

On the positive side, it shows that many researchers are eager and
ready to upset scientific dogma, and just as ready to admit error
when it turns out so.

Jeroen Belleman

Flyguy · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:48:52â¯PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers..
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

It\'s rather funny that anyone things an automaker is \"switching\" back to ICE. Everyone is converting to BEVs as fast as they can ramp up. It\'s just that some automakers don\'t make cars that are as good as other brands, regardless of the hype.

Its more complicated than it might seem.. For example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66172158
John

Yes, they have obviously done their sums and worked out that the EV
revolution will take decades, despite all the hype, so are hedging
their bets on ICE being around for a long time yet.

The media are at last starting to wake up to the fact that the net
zero thing isn\'t going to happen any time soon. Why ?: Because it\'s
targets are not deliverable. The ex CEO of UK National Grid in
the press, DT, from memory, saying that the required infrastructure,
generation, network, substations and individual properties will all
need a major upgrade, costing anything up to a trillion and taking
20-30 years to get in place.
That is probably true for the UK. But, in countries with first world infrastructure, it will require relatively little investment in the grid. Mostly it will just be the addition of 30A, 240V charge points, which can already be accommodated in the vast majority of homes.

I get that you don\'t know much about the topic, because you clearly, have never looked at it from a realistic perspective. Once you stop promoting all the hype, and look at the issues realistically, you will see BEVs are immensely practical and a significant advancement over ICE vehicles..

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
That is, simply, not true. The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 chargers as I already pointed out in a previous post. Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance that part of the grid. Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
Against my better judgement I will discuss this with you. But as soon as you start getting offensive and not discussing the facts, I will no longer respond.

From the first link, âThere are places even today [in the city] where we canât even take one more heat pump without having to rebuild the portion of the [electrical distribution] system. Or we canât even have one EV charger go in.â and immediately after that, \"Peak loading is the primary concern.\"

These two statements do not necessarily go together. The first statement is from Tomm Marshall, assistant director of utilities. He talks as if charging BEVs is exactly the same as adding another heat pump. Well, that may be true in terms of the way they treat such devices in the code. But, there\'s no reason for that.
He didn\'t say they went together, but they might. A friend of mine lives in Palo Alto and they wanted to put in another heat pump. This required an electrical upgrade that took over a YEAR to get approved. The same would go for an L2 charger.
And that is exactly the point. The code is what needs to be modified, not the grid. Did you not follow the reasoning?
BEVs have a great deal of flexibility in *when* they are charged. A very large majority of BEVs come home each day, only needing a few kWh of charge being added. The average daily drive in the US is around 40 miles, which is 10 kWh in most BEVs. That can be done from a 120V, 15A outlet overnight, presenting virtually an unnoticed additional load. The only upgrade to anything is the use of the charging timers already available in most BEVs and the federal mandate they be included in all new BEVs. Problem solved!
This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.
Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.
The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.
You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.
Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.
This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.
This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.
Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â
Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.
Evening means when the sun is down.
By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â
Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.
Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.
I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.
You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.
Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.
Of course they do - they want to meet there customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.
Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.
I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?
Now, yes, but not by 2035.

I should qualify that. There are now cities such as Palo Alto where putting in an L2 charger is problematic. And ALL of the people living w/o off-street parking (apartments, multi-family buildings, etc.) have a major problem with charging while they sleep.
https://www.avweb.com/uncategorized/eagle-and-gami-not-a-transparent-process/

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.
Read the references provided.

--

Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Ricky · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:48:52â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers..
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

It\'s rather funny that anyone things an automaker is \"switching\" back to ICE. Everyone is converting to BEVs as fast as they can ramp up. It\'s just that some automakers don\'t make cars that are as good as other brands, regardless of the hype.

Its more complicated than it might seem.. For example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66172158
John

Yes, they have obviously done their sums and worked out that the EV
revolution will take decades, despite all the hype, so are hedging
their bets on ICE being around for a long time yet.

The media are at last starting to wake up to the fact that the net
zero thing isn\'t going to happen any time soon. Why ?: Because it\'s
targets are not deliverable. The ex CEO of UK National Grid in
the press, DT, from memory, saying that the required infrastructure,
generation, network, substations and individual properties will all
need a major upgrade, costing anything up to a trillion and taking
20-30 years to get in place.
That is probably true for the UK. But, in countries with first world infrastructure, it will require relatively little investment in the grid. Mostly it will just be the addition of 30A, 240V charge points, which can already be accommodated in the vast majority of homes.

I get that you don\'t know much about the topic, because you clearly, have never looked at it from a realistic perspective. Once you stop promoting all the hype, and look at the issues realistically, you will see BEVs are immensely practical and a significant advancement over ICE vehicles..

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
That is, simply, not true. The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 chargers as I already pointed out in a previous post. Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance that part of the grid. Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
Against my better judgement I will discuss this with you. But as soon as you start getting offensive and not discussing the facts, I will no longer respond.

From the first link, âThere are places even today [in the city] where we canât even take one more heat pump without having to rebuild the portion of the [electrical distribution] system. Or we canât even have one EV charger go in.â and immediately after that, \"Peak loading is the primary concern.\"

These two statements do not necessarily go together. The first statement is from Tomm Marshall, assistant director of utilities. He talks as if charging BEVs is exactly the same as adding another heat pump. Well, that may be true in terms of the way they treat such devices in the code. But, there\'s no reason for that.
He didn\'t say they went together, but they might. A friend of mine lives in Palo Alto and they wanted to put in another heat pump. This required an electrical upgrade that took over a YEAR to get approved. The same would go for an L2 charger.
And that is exactly the point. The code is what needs to be modified, not the grid. Did you not follow the reasoning?
BEVs have a great deal of flexibility in *when* they are charged. A very large majority of BEVs come home each day, only needing a few kWh of charge being added. The average daily drive in the US is around 40 miles, which is 10 kWh in most BEVs. That can be done from a 120V, 15A outlet overnight, presenting virtually an unnoticed additional load. The only upgrade to anything is the use of the charging timers already available in most BEVs and the federal mandate they be included in all new BEVs. Problem solved!
This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.
Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.
The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.
You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.
Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.
This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.

My heat pump has a 10 kW heating element. On a cold winter night, every house in the neighborhood is running at a similar level. So, clearly the distribution grid is built to handle such levels of power. Level 2 chargers are typically 32A or 8 kW. When installed for that level of power, it is seldom they need to run for more than an hour or two. We may find there needs to be coordination by the power company to prevent peak levels at night, from exceeding some level, but this is largely addressed by the number I already provided. The average daily miles driven in the US is just 40, or 10 kWh. The charge level is not set by the EVSE, it\'s controlled by the EV. So the charging level can be set for less than 2 kW and charged over a six hour period, being barely noticeable by the grid.

This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.
Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf

Help me understand. Where do they say there will be a problem charging BEVs? Here\'s what I found...

************************************************************
Major Findings

2028 resource adequacy is likely to be sufficient for high EV penetration assumption.

EV resource adequacy can be doubled with managed charging strategies.
************************************************************

Sounds to me like they are saying... \"no problemo\"!

https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â
Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.
Evening means when the sun is down.

So, what is the point of the above citing?

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â
Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.
Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

Again, you fail to say anything. I have said that we can charge during the day. No one has said we should not charge during the day. I\'ve simply pointed out that we have sufficient generating and transmission capacity to charge 100% of BEVs at night. Nothing about solar power disputes this. If we continue to add solar power during the day, BEVs will be the optimal load to pair with that, because BEVs have very flexible charging schedules. Remember the 40 miles per day average? That means a typical BEV can go most of the week without charging! So, a few days without charging is not a problem.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.
You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.
Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.
Of course they do - they want to meet there customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

LOL! They are for-profit companies.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.
I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?
Now, yes, but not by 2035.

Can you explain why? Right now, today, if every ICE in the US were replaced by a BEV, we could charge them all at night. Easy, peasy.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.
Read the references provided.

I did, but you seem to have failed to.

This gets very old and is why I seldom engage with you. Instead of having an intelligent conversation, your argue in circles and never prove a point.

Unless you have something substantial to say, I\'m done here.

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 6:48:52â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2....@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.

Wind turbines and solar cells now generate electricity more cheaply than cola fired power stations and have done for about ten years now. Sewage Sweeper still hasn\'t noticed.

A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.

Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.

But pretty much all the investment in future power generation is in renewables, mainly because they provide cheaper power, even after you\'ve figures in the batteries and pumped storage required to firm them up.

Sewage Sweeper\'s mind is locked about ten years in the past.

The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.

You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.

Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.

This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.

Neighbourhood grids were designed to handle the loads around when they were designed. They were also designed to be easily expandable because the demand has been rising more or less steadily since electricity started being delivered to households. We did go through a phase when appliances got more efficient and demand didn\'t rise as fast. but the system is flexible and has always had to be. Your reference was all about getting around to spending the extra money, rather than any kind of claim that it couldn\'t be done.

This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.

Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â

Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.

Evening means when the sun is down.

That\'s actually night.

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â

Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.

Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.

You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.

Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.

Of course they do - they want to meet their customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

And make money while investing as little as possible.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.

I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.

Sewage Sweeper is deeply into self-delusion.

Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?

Now, yes, but not by 2035.

Sewage sweeper thinks he knows what\'s going to happen in 2035

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.

Read the references provided.

Sewage Sweeper has a reading comprehension problem, but one that he can\'t recognise. He can always read stuff as meaning what he wants it to means, even if it says something completely different.

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

Flyguy · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 7:08:40â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:48:52â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers.
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars..
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

It\'s rather funny that anyone things an automaker is \"switching\" back to ICE. Everyone is converting to BEVs as fast as they can ramp up. It\'s just that some automakers don\'t make cars that are as good as other brands, regardless of the hype.

Its more complicated than it might seem.. For example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66172158
John

Yes, they have obviously done their sums and worked out that the EV
revolution will take decades, despite all the hype, so are hedging
their bets on ICE being around for a long time yet.

The media are at last starting to wake up to the fact that the net
zero thing isn\'t going to happen any time soon. Why ?: Because it\'s
targets are not deliverable. The ex CEO of UK National Grid in
the press, DT, from memory, saying that the required infrastructure,
generation, network, substations and individual properties will all
need a major upgrade, costing anything up to a trillion and taking
20-30 years to get in place.
That is probably true for the UK. But, in countries with first world infrastructure, it will require relatively little investment in the grid. Mostly it will just be the addition of 30A, 240V charge points, which can already be accommodated in the vast majority of homes.

I get that you don\'t know much about the topic, because you clearly, have never looked at it from a realistic perspective. Once you stop promoting all the hype, and look at the issues realistically, you will see BEVs are immensely practical and a significant advancement over ICE vehicles.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
That is, simply, not true. The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 chargers as I already pointed out in a previous post. Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance that part of the grid. Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
Against my better judgement I will discuss this with you. But as soon as you start getting offensive and not discussing the facts, I will no longer respond.

From the first link, âThere are places even today [in the city] where we canât even take one more heat pump without having to rebuild the portion of the [electrical distribution] system. Or we canât even have one EV charger go in.â and immediately after that, \"Peak loading is the primary concern.\"

These two statements do not necessarily go together. The first statement is from Tomm Marshall, assistant director of utilities. He talks as if charging BEVs is exactly the same as adding another heat pump. Well, that may be true in terms of the way they treat such devices in the code. But, there\'s no reason for that.
He didn\'t say they went together, but they might. A friend of mine lives in Palo Alto and they wanted to put in another heat pump. This required an electrical upgrade that took over a YEAR to get approved. The same would go for an L2 charger.
And that is exactly the point. The code is what needs to be modified, not the grid. Did you not follow the reasoning?
BEVs have a great deal of flexibility in *when* they are charged. A very large majority of BEVs come home each day, only needing a few kWh of charge being added. The average daily drive in the US is around 40 miles, which is 10 kWh in most BEVs. That can be done from a 120V, 15A outlet overnight, presenting virtually an unnoticed additional load. The only upgrade to anything is the use of the charging timers already available in most BEVs and the federal mandate they be included in all new BEVs. Problem solved!
This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.
Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.
The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.
You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.
Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.
This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.
My heat pump has a 10 kW heating element. On a cold winter night, every house in the neighborhood is running at a similar level. So, clearly the distribution grid is built to handle such levels of power. Level 2 chargers are typically 32A or 8 kW. When installed for that level of power, it is seldom they need to run for more than an hour or two. We may find there needs to be coordination by the power company to prevent peak levels at night, from exceeding some level, but this is largely addressed by the number I already provided. The average daily miles driven in the US is just 40, or 10 kWh.. The charge level is not set by the EVSE, it\'s controlled by the EV. So the charging level can be set for less than 2 kW and charged over a six hour period, being barely noticeable by the grid.

Your utility has already provisioned a grid to supply your heating needs. That IS NOT what we are talking about. We ARE talking about ADDING a substantial number of NEW loads that the grid WAS NOT designed for.

This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.
Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
Help me understand. Where do they say there will be a problem charging BEVs? Here\'s what I found...

************************************************************
Major Findings

2028 resource adequacy is likely to be sufficient for high EV penetration assumption.

EV resource adequacy can be doubled with managed charging strategies.
************************************************************

Sounds to me like they are saying... \"no problemo\"!

Biden and the rest of you greenies ARE NOT satisfied with 24M EVs - you want ALL of the vehicles to be EVs. That is more than TEN TIMES that number.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â
Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.
Evening means when the sun is down.
So, what is the point of the above citing?

The nighttime charging will not be an option.

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â
Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.
Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.
Again, you fail to say anything. I have said that we can charge during the day. No one has said we should not charge during the day. I\'ve simply pointed out that we have sufficient generating and transmission capacity to charge 100% of BEVs at night. Nothing about solar power disputes this. If we continue to add solar power during the day, BEVs will be the optimal load to pair with that, because BEVs have very flexible charging schedules. Remember the 40 miles per day average? That means a typical BEV can go most of the week without charging! So, a few days without charging is not a problem.

You ignore that you greenies are wanting to take fossil fuel generators OFFLINE! These will NOT be available in a short time frame with woefully inadequate renewable generators to replace them.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.
You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.
Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.
Of course they do - they want to meet there customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.
LOL! They are for-profit companies.

Some are, some aren\'t. But NONE of them can provide power at a loss.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.
I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?
Now, yes, but not by 2035.
Can you explain why? Right now, today, if every ICE in the US were replaced by a BEV, we could charge them all at night. Easy, peasy.

I already provided the study.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.
Read the references provided.
I did, but you seem to have failed to.

Oh, I have - you just don\'t comprehend them.

This gets very old and is why I seldom engage with you. Instead of having an intelligent conversation, your argue in circles and never prove a point..

Unless you have something substantial to say, I\'m done here.

Fine by me - I tried to educate you, but you are beyond hope.

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Flyguy · Aug 28, 2023

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:42:49â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 6:48:52â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2....@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
Wind turbines and solar cells now generate electricity more cheaply than cola fired power stations and have done for about ten years now. Sewage Sweeper still hasn\'t noticed.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.

Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.
But pretty much all the investment in future power generation is in renewables, mainly because they provide cheaper power, even after you\'ve figures in the batteries and pumped storage required to firm them up.

There is a place for renewables, but not at a 100% level because they are undependable.

Sewage Sweeper\'s mind is locked about ten years in the past.

LOL! That would go for you, Bozo!! I am thinking about the future.

The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.

You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.

Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.

This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.
Neighbourhood grids were designed to handle the loads around when they were designed. They were also designed to be easily expandable because the demand has been rising more or less steadily since electricity started being delivered to households. We did go through a phase when appliances got more efficient and demand didn\'t rise as fast. but the system is flexible and has always had to be. Your reference was all about getting around to spending the extra money, rather than any kind of claim that it couldn\'t be done.

I give you an article from the IEEE that refutes that notion, yet you put out that garbage anyhow.

This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.

Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â

Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.

Evening means when the sun is down.
That\'s actually night.

No, nighttime is complete darkness. Solar generation ceases well before sundown.

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â

Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.

Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.

You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.

Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.

Of course they do - they want to meet their customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

And make money while investing as little as possible.

Pure BULLSHIT! Utilities invest HUGE amounts of money in their infrastructure that must be recovered by the rates they charge. Furthermore, they are HIGHLY regulated, so all of their decisions are carefully scrutinized by regulators and customers.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.

I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Sewage Sweeper is deeply into self-delusion.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?

Now, yes, but not by 2035.
Sewage sweeper thinks he knows what\'s going to happen in 2035

Well, that is what these lying politicians tell us - maybe you have a more accurate insight, but nothing is coming out of your mouth.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.

Read the references provided.
Sewage Sweeper has a reading comprehension problem, but one that he can\'t recognise. He can always read stuff as meaning what he wants it to means, even if it says something completely different.

And this bullshit is coming from an idiot that can\'t even spell his name right and believes in NUKING and FIREBOMBING his OWN COUNTRY!

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

Ricky · Aug 28, 2023

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 8:40:11â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 7:08:40â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:48:52â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers.
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

It\'s rather funny that anyone things an automaker is \"switching\" back to ICE. Everyone is converting to BEVs as fast as they can ramp up. It\'s just that some automakers don\'t make cars that are as good as other brands, regardless of the hype.

Its more complicated than it might seem.. For example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66172158
John

Yes, they have obviously done their sums and worked out that the EV
revolution will take decades, despite all the hype, so are hedging
their bets on ICE being around for a long time yet.

The media are at last starting to wake up to the fact that the net
zero thing isn\'t going to happen any time soon. Why ?: Because it\'s
targets are not deliverable. The ex CEO of UK National Grid in
the press, DT, from memory, saying that the required infrastructure,
generation, network, substations and individual properties will all
need a major upgrade, costing anything up to a trillion and taking
20-30 years to get in place.
That is probably true for the UK. But, in countries with first world infrastructure, it will require relatively little investment in the grid. Mostly it will just be the addition of 30A, 240V charge points, which can already be accommodated in the vast majority of homes.

I get that you don\'t know much about the topic, because you clearly, have never looked at it from a realistic perspective. Once you stop promoting all the hype, and look at the issues realistically, you will see BEVs are immensely practical and a significant advancement over ICE vehicles.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
That is, simply, not true. The nation\'s power grid was not designed to accommodate millions of L2 chargers as I already pointed out in a previous post. Peppering a neighborhood with a platoon of L2 chargers can imbalance that part of the grid. Here are the IEEE articles yet again:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463709
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-ev-transition-explained-2658463735
Against my better judgement I will discuss this with you. But as soon as you start getting offensive and not discussing the facts, I will no longer respond.

From the first link, âThere are places even today [in the city] where we canât even take one more heat pump without having to rebuild the portion of the [electrical distribution] system. Or we canât even have one EV charger go in.â and immediately after that, \"Peak loading is the primary concern.\"

These two statements do not necessarily go together. The first statement is from Tomm Marshall, assistant director of utilities. He talks as if charging BEVs is exactly the same as adding another heat pump. Well, that may be true in terms of the way they treat such devices in the code. But, there\'s no reason for that.
He didn\'t say they went together, but they might. A friend of mine lives in Palo Alto and they wanted to put in another heat pump. This required an electrical upgrade that took over a YEAR to get approved. The same would go for an L2 charger.
And that is exactly the point. The code is what needs to be modified, not the grid. Did you not follow the reasoning?
BEVs have a great deal of flexibility in *when* they are charged. A very large majority of BEVs come home each day, only needing a few kWh of charge being added. The average daily drive in the US is around 40 miles, which is 10 kWh in most BEVs. That can be done from a 120V, 15A outlet overnight, presenting virtually an unnoticed additional load. The only upgrade to anything is the use of the charging timers already available in most BEVs and the federal mandate they be included in all new BEVs. Problem solved!
This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.
A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.
Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.
The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.
You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.
Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple.. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.
This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.
My heat pump has a 10 kW heating element. On a cold winter night, every house in the neighborhood is running at a similar level. So, clearly the distribution grid is built to handle such levels of power. Level 2 chargers are typically 32A or 8 kW. When installed for that level of power, it is seldom they need to run for more than an hour or two. We may find there needs to be coordination by the power company to prevent peak levels at night, from exceeding some level, but this is largely addressed by the number I already provided. The average daily miles driven in the US is just 40, or 10 kWh. The charge level is not set by the EVSE, it\'s controlled by the EV. So the charging level can be set for less than 2 kW and charged over a six hour period, being barely noticeable by the grid.
Your utility has already provisioned a grid to supply your heating needs. That IS NOT what we are talking about. We ARE talking about ADDING a substantial number of NEW loads that the grid WAS NOT designed for.
This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.
Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.
https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
Help me understand. Where do they say there will be a problem charging BEVs? Here\'s what I found...

************************************************************
Major Findings

2028 resource adequacy is likely to be sufficient for high EV penetration assumption.

EV resource adequacy can be doubled with managed charging strategies.
************************************************************

Sounds to me like they are saying... \"no problemo\"!
Biden and the rest of you greenies ARE NOT satisfied with 24M EVs - you want ALL of the vehicles to be EVs. That is more than TEN TIMES that number.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â
Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.
Evening means when the sun is down.
So, what is the point of the above citing?
The nighttime charging will not be an option.
By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â
Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.
Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.
Again, you fail to say anything. I have said that we can charge during the day. No one has said we should not charge during the day. I\'ve simply pointed out that we have sufficient generating and transmission capacity to charge 100% of BEVs at night. Nothing about solar power disputes this. If we continue to add solar power during the day, BEVs will be the optimal load to pair with that, because BEVs have very flexible charging schedules. Remember the 40 miles per day average? That means a typical BEV can go most of the week without charging! So, a few days without charging is not a problem.
You ignore that you greenies are wanting to take fossil fuel generators OFFLINE! These will NOT be available in a short time frame with woefully inadequate renewable generators to replace them.
I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.
You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.
Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.
Of course they do - they want to meet there customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.
LOL! They are for-profit companies.
Some are, some aren\'t. But NONE of them can provide power at a loss.
Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.
I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.
Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?
Now, yes, but not by 2035.
Can you explain why? Right now, today, if every ICE in the US were replaced by a BEV, we could charge them all at night. Easy, peasy.
I already provided the study.
If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.
Read the references provided.
I did, but you seem to have failed to.
Oh, I have - you just don\'t comprehend them.

This gets very old and is why I seldom engage with you. Instead of having an intelligent conversation, your argue in circles and never prove a point.

Unless you have something substantial to say, I\'m done here.
Fine by me - I tried to educate you, but you are beyond hope.

As is usual, there is nothing in the links you have provided that say we can\'t charged all the BEVs when all cars on the roads will be BEVs. Your links don\'t say that, no matter what you think. If they did say this, you would be showing us where it does say that.

I\'m tired of trying to talk to someone who gives all appearances of being schizophrenic. When you learn about charging BEVs, I\'ll be happy to talk to you. Until then, bye.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:51:13â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:42:49â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 6:48:52â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.

Wind turbines and solar cells now generate electricity more cheaply than cola fired power stations and have done for about ten years now. Sewage Sweeper still hasn\'t noticed.

A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.

Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.

But pretty much all the investment in future power generation is in renewables, mainly because they provide cheaper power, even after you\'ve figures in the batteries and pumped storage required to firm them up.

There is a place for renewables, but not at a 100% level because they are undependable.

Sewage Sweeper can\'t conceive that enough pumped storage and batteries will make them dependable enough. And they aren\'t so much undependable as intermittent. The sun comes up every morning and the wind blows most of the time..

Sewage Sweeper\'s mind is locked about ten years in the past.

LOL! That would go for you, Bill!! I am thinking about the future.

But the information you put forward about \"low cost COAL FIRED plants\" hasn\'t been true for some ten years now, so you are making an incompetent attempt to predict the future based on obsolete information.

The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.

You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.

Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple.. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.

This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.

Neighbourhood grids were designed to handle the loads around when they were designed. They were also designed to be easily expandable because the demand has been rising more or less steadily since electricity started being delivered to households. We did go through a phase when appliances got more efficient and demand didn\'t rise as fast. but the system is flexible and has always had to be. Your reference was all about getting around to spending the extra money, rather than any kind of claim that it couldn\'t be done..

I give you an article from the IEEE that refutes that notion, yet you put out that garbage anyhow.

It didn\'t say what you claim it says, like pretty much all your references.

This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.

Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.

https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â

Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.

Evening means when the sun is down.

That\'s actually night.

No, nighttime is complete darkness. Solar generation ceases well before sundown.

It certainly slow down as the sun gets low in the sky, but it doesn\'t cease..

By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â

Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.

Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.

You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.

Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.

Of course they do - they want to meet their customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

And make money while investing as little as possible.

Pure BULLSHIT! Utilities invest HUGE amounts of money in their infrastructure that must be recovered by the rates they charge. Furthermore, they are HIGHLY regulated, so all of their decisions are carefully scrutinized by regulators and customers.

As was ENRON. \"Regulatory Capture\" is the term that describes the way they get away with over-investing in infrastructure and recovering the cost from their consujmers.

Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.

I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.

Sewage Sweeper is deeply into self-delusion.

Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?

Now, yes, but not by 2035.
Sewage sweeper thinks he knows what\'s going to happen in 2035.

Well, that is what these lying politicians tell us - maybe you have a more accurate insight, but nothing is coming out of your mouth.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.

Read the references provided.
Sewage Sweeper has a reading comprehension problem, but one that he can\'t recognise. He can always read stuff as meaning what he wants it to means, even if it says something completely different.

And this bullshit is coming from an idiot that can\'t even spell his name right and believes in NUKING and FIREBOMBING his OWN COUNTRY!

Except of course that I don\'t believe anything of the sort, and Sewage Sweeper is propagating what he wanted my posts to mean, rather than what I actually said.

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

Flyguy · Aug 28, 2023

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 9:43:12â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:51:13â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:42:49â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 6:48:52â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

This is the irony of the situation. That over-night low cost power is being generated by COAL FIRED plants because they are the cheapest. As there is a shift from coal to solar that cheap nighttime power will vanish and be shifted to the daytime. This means charging during the day at work.

Wind turbines and solar cells now generate electricity more cheaply than cola fired power stations and have done for about ten years now. Sewage Sweeper still hasn\'t noticed.

A shift from coal to solar is only in your mind. The people who are responsible for planning these things actually understand the issues, which is not something you can say. The excess nighttime capacity, would be whatever it is they shut down from the day. Mostly that is gas based, because it can be spun up and down quickly, something that coal is less capable of.

Your mind is locked to the present day. The greenies envision shifting away from fossil fuels to so-called renewables, meaning solar and wind. But currently coal provides 37% of the world\'s electric power (https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix), and even more in Europe after Russia cut off the natgas.

But pretty much all the investment in future power generation is in renewables, mainly because they provide cheaper power, even after you\'ve figures in the batteries and pumped storage required to firm them up.

There is a place for renewables, but not at a 100% level because they are undependable.
Sewage Sweeper can\'t conceive that enough pumped storage and batteries will make them dependable enough. And they aren\'t so much undependable as intermittent. The sun comes up every morning and the wind blows most of the time.
Sewage Sweeper\'s mind is locked about ten years in the past.
LOL! That would go for you, Bill!! I am thinking about the future.

But the information you put forward about \"low cost COAL FIRED plants\" hasn\'t been true for some ten years now, so you are making an incompetent attempt to predict the future based on obsolete information.
The second statement is dealt with by the same means. No charging at peak use times, only at off peak times. Problem solved.

You are just moving peak times to nighttime. And this does not address the imbalancing of the grid by millions of L2 chargers. There just is no free lunch.

Dear God. I don\'t know why you can\'t understand something so simple. If the millions of L2 chargers operate at night, when loads are low and lots of excess generating capacity is available, the L2 chargers require no additional capacity in either generation or transmission.

This is, simply, false. Neighborhood grids are simply not designed to handle a high percentage of homes with L2 chargers all coming on at the same time. I have already provided the references supporting this.

Neighbourhood grids were designed to handle the loads around when they were designed. They were also designed to be easily expandable because the demand has been rising more or less steadily since electricity started being delivered to households. We did go through a phase when appliances got more efficient and demand didn\'t rise as fast. but the system is flexible and has always had to be. Your reference was all about getting around to spending the extra money, rather than any kind of claim that it couldn\'t be done.

I give you an article from the IEEE that refutes that notion, yet you put out that garbage anyhow.
It didn\'t say what you claim it says, like pretty much all your references.
This article also reports that the distribution transformers would need to be upgraded. This is an issue I\'ve wondered about. Where I am, there can be high demand on cold nights. That\'s strictly an issue for the local distribution in residential neighborhoods. But, using the numbers above, an extra 10 kWh from each home would barely be noticed against the backdrop of 3 to 5 kW heatpumps running all night, especially when this is still well below the daytime use.

Well, it will be noticed. Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL, my former employer) did an extensive study of this and determine that the current grid can handle up to 24M EVs without degradation. This is far short of the greenies goals by 2035.

https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/EV-AT-SCALE_1_IMPACTS_final.pdf
https://spectrum.ieee.org/electric-vehicles

In contrast, shifting to daytime charging would minimize the impact of EVs on the grid. âRight now, we have a lot of power available in the evening,â says study senior author Ram Rajagopal, an electrical engineer at Stanford University. âHowever, when we look at 2035, the grid is predominantly solar.â

Not sure what is meant by \"evening\". The California peak times extend until 9 or 10 pm.

Evening means when the sun is down.

That\'s actually night.

No, nighttime is complete darkness. Solar generation ceases well before sundown.
It certainly slow down as the sun gets low in the sky, but it doesn\'t cease.
By changing the emphasis of charging toward the daytime, âwe donât really have to add any resources to the grid,â Rajagopal says. âWeâre not saying that everyone should move to daytime charging. We think the emphasis should be a more balanced approach, more tilted toward daytime charging.â

Daytime charging is useful to make full use of solar generated power, but it\'s not necessary, because there is so much excess generation at night. Using excess solar generation during the day is fine when available.

Again, you are thinking about now, not 12 years from now.

I fully expect the local utilities to pull excuses to upgrade the local distribution grid. This is their turf. These companies are regulated, and their profits are set, in part, by the amount of capital invested.. So, they love to bump that up, especially when they can get someone else to pay for it, like the government or the local customers.

You can expect whatever you want, but the utilities are the experts at what it will take to deliver the goods. Calif. ignored their advice and has suffered rolling blackouts as a consequence. I will trust an electrical engineer a 1000 times more than a politician.

Utilities have agendas. I would hope you understand that.

Of course they do - they want to meet their customer\'s energy needs in a safe, reliable manner.

And make money while investing as little as possible.

Pure BULLSHIT! Utilities invest HUGE amounts of money in their infrastructure that must be recovered by the rates they charge. Furthermore, they are HIGHLY regulated, so all of their decisions are carefully scrutinized by regulators and customers.
As was ENRON. \"Regulatory Capture\" is the term that describes the way they get away with over-investing in infrastructure and recovering the cost from their consujmers.
Don\'t be as gullible as the utilities want you to be. BEV charging will be done mostly at night with very little impact on the grid, local or regional. It won\'t require any additional generation or transmission. BEV charging can be done largely by more fully using the facilities we already have.

I am just presenting the facts. Platitudes will not erase them.

Sewage Sweeper is deeply into self-delusion.

Actually, you seem to be ignoring most of the facts, especially that BEVs can be charged at night, without any additional generation, or transmission. Yet you continue to debate what is important. Do you agree with the fact, that BEVs can be charged at night without adding generation or transmission to the grid?

Now, yes, but not by 2035.
Sewage sweeper thinks he knows what\'s going to happen in 2035.

Well, that is what these lying politicians tell us - maybe you have a more accurate insight, but nothing is coming out of your mouth.

If you do not, you are disputing a fact. If you do agree, then we don\'t need to discuss anything else.

Read the references provided.
Sewage Sweeper has a reading comprehension problem, but one that he can\'t recognise. He can always read stuff as meaning what he wants it to means, even if it says something completely different.

And this bullshit is coming from an idiot that can\'t even spell his name right and believes in NUKING and FIREBOMBING his OWN COUNTRY!
Except of course that I don\'t believe anything of the sort, and Sewage Sweeper is propagating what he wanted my posts to mean, rather than what I actually said.

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

Hey Bozo, those are YOUR WORDS. Again, you are so incapacitated that you can\'t even SPELL YOUR OWN NAME!

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 3:33:37â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 9:43:12â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:51:13â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:42:49â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 6:48:52â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 9:28:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:35:31â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 8:04:30â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 10:15:54â¯PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 5:23:21â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 6:40:46â¯PM UTC-4, chrisq wrote:
On 8/13/23 20:54, John Walliker wrote:
On Sunday, 13 August 2023 at 21:45:47 UTC+1, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

And this bullshit is coming from an idiot that can\'t even spell his name right and believes in NUKING and FIREBOMBING his OWN COUNTRY!

Except of course that I don\'t believe anything of the sort, and Sewage Sweeper is propagating what he wanted my posts to mean, rather than what I actually said.

Hey Bill, those are YOUR WORDS. Again, you are so incapacitated that you can\'t even SPELL YOUR OWN NAME!

No, they aren\'t my words (which you haven\'t quoted) but rather your decidedly bizarre misunderstanding of what I did post.

And while I confess to making an occasional typo while spelling my own name.. that isn\'t evidence of any kind of incapacity, no matter how much you\'d like it to be.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

whit3rd · Aug 28, 2023

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:45:47â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers.
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

An \'ideal\' condition is what is defined in those testing protocols that are required
(by FTC?) for mileage testing. That\'s not the same as optimal-for-mileage-estimate,
but it is certainly an ideal situation.

Any conforms-to-this-model scenario is \'ideal\', even if it isn\'t a best-case.

Ricky · Aug 28, 2023

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 3:41:40â¯AM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:45:47â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/08/lawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints/?utm_email=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&lctg=75F424DF74BD75C39415D4E91D&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2023%2f08%2f08%2flawsuit-tesla-faked-driving-range-for-cars-created-special-unit-to-squelch-complaints%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-wednesday-morning-report-nl&utm_content=manual

Why don\'t they just change the scaling of the odometer?

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/

When the Tesla semi starts getting used, truck drivers won\'t be so
wussy as the car owners. Don\'t mess with truck drivers.
What do you mean by \"wussy\"? Is that actually expecting the performance that the car tells you?

Here is an example of a severely underperforming EV, this time a Ford pickup:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
AFAIAA, all these manufacturers quote figures for ideal conditions.
Consequently, if you go up a hill, you\'ll get less mileage. There are
many other examples. As electronic designers, no one here should be
unfamiliar with the \'ideal\' concept.
As an aside, someone told me the other day that BMW are falling out of
love with EVs due to lack of infrastructure and concerns over battery
recycling and are switching production back to ICE cars.
No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.
An \'ideal\' condition is what is defined in those testing protocols that are required
(by FTC?) for mileage testing. That\'s not the same as optimal-for-mileage-estimate,
but it is certainly an ideal situation.

Any conforms-to-this-model scenario is \'ideal\', even if it isn\'t a best-case.

Can someone translate this for me? I\'m not even sure what language it is in. Google is no help at all.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Anthony William Sloman · Aug 28, 2023

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 6:01:27â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 3:41:40â¯AM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:45:47â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 1:07:30â¯PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 5:48:30?PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 4:04:42?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

No automaker gives mileage figures for \"ideal\" conditions. The government has driving conditions defined and everyone uses the same conditions. It has been this way for ICE for decades and is no different for BEVs.

An \'ideal\' condition is what is defined in those testing protocols that are required (by FTC?) for mileage testing. That\'s not the same as optimal-for-mileage-estimate, but it is certainly an ideal situation.

Any conforms-to-this-model scenario is \'ideal\', even if it isn\'t a best-case.

Can someone translate this for me? I\'m not even sure what language it is in. Google is no help at all.

It strikes me as perfectly intelligible English. It does play with the contrast between \"ideal\" conditions and \"optimal-for-mileage\" which is a different ideal.

You may need to work on your English language skills.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Tesla has been FAKING range estimates...

Jan Panteltje

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

jeroen

Guest

Jan Panteltje

Guest

Ricky

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

Flyguy

Guest

jeroen

Guest

Flyguy

Guest

Ricky

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

Flyguy

Guest

Flyguy

Guest

Ricky

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

Flyguy

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

whit3rd

Guest

Ricky

Guest

Anthony William Sloman

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor