Re: [EVDL] EV cold weather range

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

It’s the battery that impacts the range in BEVs. In an ICE, the battery is 
mainly important for starting, with the engine charging the battery.  Sometimes 
you do need a better battery for starting in very extreme weather.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 22, 2022, at 9:11 AM, Ed Thorpe via EV  wrote:
> 
> BTW, how much are ICE cars hit with drop in gas mileage during the winter 
> month? How come no one complains about that? Or are EVs hid harder in the 
> cold wintertime?
> 
> 
> Thanks, 
> Ed 
> 
>> On Dec 22, 2022, at 7:49 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Why your Tesla hates the cold, too, and what you can do about it
>> https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/why-your-tesla-hates-the-cold-too-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/
>> 
>> ...
>> How much did the cold affect his car’s performance?
>> ...
>> The only difference he’s noticed is a loss of about 3%, or 10 miles, of his 
>> normal driving range.
>> ...
>> But batteries take a bigger hit from heating the car’s interior, MacKenzie 
>> said, not from the weather itself.
>> ...
>> A 2019 study by AAA found the driving range plummets up to 41% on average 
>> when the temperature drops to 20 degrees and the heater is on. And in a 2020 
>> test drive by Car and Driver magazine, a Tesla Model 3 lost over 60 miles of 
>> range after being driven with the seat warmers on and the heat on full blast.
>> ...
>> Electric vehicles’ performance in the cold shouldn’t be a deterrent for 
>> prospective buyers, MacKenzie said. In 2021, about 86% of cars sold in 
>> Norway were electric. Temperatures there hover around or below 40 degrees 
>> for almost half the year.
>> ...
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> And, here, is some local humor :)
>> https://theneedling.com/2022/11/18/tickets-selling-out-quickly-for-queen-anne-sedan-snow-slam
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> 
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] Tesla accepting CCS

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Isn’t China where most of Tesla’s sales are?  While US and Europe have some 
importance, near term performance is all about China.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 21, 2022, at 7:41 AM, John Lussmyer via EV  wrote:
> 
> On 12/21/2022 12:08 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote:
>>  That's why I think that despite strong (but declining) Tesla sales, Renault,
>> Stellantis, and VW will eventually clean Tesla's clock in Europe.? They
>> actually build EVs for normal people - and normal, middle-income Europoeans
>> are buying them.?
> You do realize that the Tesla Model Y is likely to be the most popular car 
> (not EV, car) in the EU (possibly the world) next year?
> That's just following the production/sales numbers - which, by the way, don't 
> show any declining sales. (another year of 50% growth)
> Also, VW has now decided to change how they are going to make EV's - by 
> delaying plans for several more years.
> 
> Just where do you get your info?
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EVLN: EU agrees on 2035 ICEV ban, sort of

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: LatestNews_1.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5038 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EVLN: EU agrees on 2035 ICEV ban, sort of

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Don’t forget that recycling of lead acid batteries contaminates the communities 
around them, creating major health problems to those near them and downwind.



- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 30, 2022, at 1:56 PM, Lee Hart via EV  wrote:
> 
> Peri Hartman wrote:
>>> There's been a move back to LiFePo because it doesn't use cobalt. What
>>> else can be done?
> 
> EV List Lackey wrote:
>> Nickel metal hydride?
> 
> There are actually lots of rechargeable battery technologies that could be 
> used. Each has different strengths and weaknesses.
> 
> It's unfortunate that manufacturers tend to prefer a monoculture. "One thing 
> to rule them all". But anything that you try to apply to 8 billion people is 
> bound to cause unforeseen problems. Different applications should really use 
> different solutions.
> 
> Lead-acid is cheap, and widely recyclable. But it's relatively heavy and has 
> a low energy density. It still makes sense for short-range EVs like golf 
> carts, fork lifts, scooters, etc. Also, don't forget that virtually every ICE 
> is still using lead-acids.
> 
> Nickel-based batteries (nickel-iron, nickel-cadmium, nimh) have higher energy 
> density and longer life, and the materials are relatively abundant. Nickel is 
> expensive, but fairly easy to recycle (though it's not being widely done for 
> batteries).
> 
> Lithium-based batteries have the highest energy density, but are expensive, 
> less safe, and (at least for the present) not being recycled.
> 
> And, there are lots of other chemistries that could be used. We should be 
> exploring *every* option; not just blindly picking one.
> 
> Lee Hart
> 
> -- 
> "#3 pencils and quadrille pads." -- Seymour Cray, when asked
> what CAD tools he used to design the Cray I supercomputer
> --
> Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com
> 
> -- 
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] Manchin agrees to climate bill

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Responding to myself…

I’ve had a quick look at the complete bill, and yes, there are some vehicle 
production credits in the bill that will apply to BEVs, as well as a tax credit 
for buyers, with a cost limit on the vehicle, and an income limit for the 
taxpayer.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jul 27, 2022, at 7:03 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> I don’t know yet the details on this either, but I expect more of a focus on 
> hydrogen than BEV, based upon w comments Manchin has made in the past, 
> talking with people who have had some discussions with him, and his comments 
> last week at his Committee’s Hydrogen Hub hearing.
> 
> I would expect a production tax credit as part of the package. 
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 27, 2022, at 5:51 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> It really is a surprise to read this news. Whether he keeps his word is yet 
>> to be seen, but I hope he does. I think I read that it will provide means 
>> for reducing overall carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030. Certainly that 
>> will include boosting EV manufacturing and sales dramatically.
>> 
>> The other good news (for Americans, anyway) is the technology bill that 
>> passed the senate today. As I understand, it's merely process now to get it 
>> through the house and get Biden's signature. That will encourage chip 
>> manufacturing directly in the US, which should give us better supply line 
>> predictability for chips for EVs and everything electronic. Not to mention 
>> the increased jobs and talent it should bring to the US.
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>> 
>> -- Original Message --
>> From: "Lawrence Rhodes via EV" 
>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>> Cc: "Lawrence Rhodes" 
>> Sent: 27-Jul-22 17:11:16
>> Subject: [EVDL] Manchin agrees to climate bill
>> 
>>> https://www.thewellnews.com/political-news/in-a-stunner-manchin-schumer-strike-deal-on-climate-tax-package/
>>>  wondering what EV incentives there are, if any? Lawrence Rhodes
>>> -- next part --
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL: 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>> 
> 
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] Manchin agrees to climate bill

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I don’t know yet the details on this either, but I expect more of a focus on 
hydrogen than BEV, based upon w comments Manchin has made in the past, talking 
with people who have had some discussions with him, and his comments last week 
at his Committee’s Hydrogen Hub hearing.

I would expect a production tax credit as part of the package. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jul 27, 2022, at 5:51 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> It really is a surprise to read this news. Whether he keeps his word is yet 
> to be seen, but I hope he does. I think I read that it will provide means for 
> reducing overall carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030. Certainly that will 
> include boosting EV manufacturing and sales dramatically.
> 
> The other good news (for Americans, anyway) is the technology bill that 
> passed the senate today. As I understand, it's merely process now to get it 
> through the house and get Biden's signature. That will encourage chip 
> manufacturing directly in the US, which should give us better supply line 
> predictability for chips for EVs and everything electronic. Not to mention 
> the increased jobs and talent it should bring to the US.
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Lawrence Rhodes via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "Lawrence Rhodes" 
> Sent: 27-Jul-22 17:11:16
> Subject: [EVDL] Manchin agrees to climate bill
> 
>> https://www.thewellnews.com/political-news/in-a-stunner-manchin-schumer-strike-deal-on-climate-tax-package/
>>  wondering what EV incentives there are, if any? Lawrence Rhodes
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EVLN: DC plans (accidental) EV tax

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

While batteries are increasing their power density, I’m not convinced that they 
will lighten. Instead, the choice will be made to increase range.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jun 13, 2022, at 11:30 AM, Jay Summet via EV  wrote:
> 
> As an investor in Aptera (which is making lightweight aerodynamic EV's) I 
> have no problem taxing heavy vehicles, regardless of their mode of propulsion.
> 
> Heavy vehicles cause more wear on the road, are less efficient than light 
> vehicles, and make the roads less safe for pedestrians, motorcyclists, and 
> compact car drivers (in collisions).
> 
> At least this tax is fuel type agnostic, unlike some of the EV specific 
> license taxes that other states have implemented.
> 
> 
> Jay
> 
>> On 6/13/22 12:44, EV List Lackey via EV wrote:
>> Washington DC plans to increase yearly vehicle license fees from $72 to $175
>> for vehicles over 3500lb.  Owners of vehicles with weight over 5000lb would
>> get hit with $250, and over 6000lb, $500.
>> The proposal is aimed at discouraging purchase of big SUVs and pickups, and
>> compelling their owners to pay for the heavy vehicles' greater social costs
>> (traffic injuries and deaths, road degredation).
>> They seem to have forgotten that EV batteries add weight.  This will raise
>> license fees on almost all production EVs.
>> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-26/a-new-way-to-curb-the-
>> rise-of-oversized-pickups-and-suvs
>> Shortcut: https://v.gd/Umr8Jm
>> Mini Cooper SE Electric 3144lb - $72
>> Nissan Leaf 3538lb - $175
>> Tesla 3 SR Plus 3582lb - $175
>> Chevrolet Bolt 3589lb - $175
>> Hyundai Kona Electric 3715lb - $175
>> Kia Niro EV 3854lb - $175
>> Kia EV6 4023lb - $175
>> Ford Mustang Mach E 4394lb - $175
>> VW ID4 4559lb - $175
>> Tesla S LR 4561lb - $175
>> Tesla X LR 5185lb - $250
>> Ford F150 Lightning 6015lb - $500
>> GMC Hummer EV 9046lb - $500
>> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
>> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>  Some people ask, "Why?" Others ask, "Why not?"
>>  Then later they say, "Oh."
>>   -- Found on the Net
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/sub/index.html
>> CONFIG: http://lists.evdl.org/options.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/sub/index.html
> CONFIG: http://lists.evdl.org/options.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/sub/index.html
CONFIG: http://lists.evdl.org/options.cgi/ev-evdl.org
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] new topics (Why people dislike Tesla)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I don’t know that you will find a BEV van with that range for awhile.

Commercial use and demand (like package delivery) will be needed first. For 
that kind of range, DHL in Europe has said that above 150 km (miles?) it makes 
no sense, as the space needed takes away too much from payload space. They’ve 
said something like “we get paid for moving packages, not batteries”.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 28, 2022, at 5:16 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> you're right. In most cases, there's probably a commercially built EV that 
> will meet one's desires. Conversions are generally not worth the cost or 
> work. (Although I still consider converting my ancient honda odyssey, since 
> no one is making an EV minivan that's useful for hauling lots of stuff and 
> has 250+ mile range.)
> 
> But there are new topics which could come up. Here are some that are relevant 
> to me or could be:
> - tradeoffs of changing toe-in to improve range
> - hydraulic (or other) lift for higher ground clearance
> - how to protect the battery from ground strikes
> - what does it take to replace stock wheels and tires with something having 
> higher sidewalls
> - how does one remove the center console (bedroom closet, these days) for 
> more free space
> - kit to reduce drag coefficient (some cars look like barges)
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "EV List Lackey via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "EV List Lackey" 
> Sent: 28-May-22 10:54:52
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Why people dislike Tesla
> 
>> It's been interesting to watch this thread, and think about how posts here
>> on the EV list have changed.
>> 
>> The EVDL has been around for over 30 years now.  Even as recently as 2008-
>> 10, we were all about conversions.  Posts flew by on motor brush advance,
>> Lovejoy couplers, adapter plates, controllers, battery temps, charger
>> efficiency and isolation, cooling, heating, BMSes, suspension tweaks, belly
>> pans, power steering drives, brake vacuum, front wheel toe, tire inflation
>> pressures, rolling resistance, disk brake drag ... on and on and on.  Who
>> can forget the debates over clutch vs clutchless, flooded vs AGM, AC vs DC?
>> We were literally designing EVs here, one at a time.
>> 
>> Now it's 2022.  We've had 12 years of the Mitsubishi Imiev*, 11 years of the
>> Nissan Leaf, and 10 of the Tesla S.
>> 
>> What are we talking about now?  Dealer service.
>> 
>> Whodathunkit?!
>> 
>> This is the world we all pined for back when we were trying to figure out
>> how to cram in one more battery and make the automatic transmission shift at
>> the right points for an ADC FB1-4001, back when Solectria's guys were piling
>> up Geo Metro mufflers and radiators behind their shop in Wilmington.
>> 
>> Still, I have to admit, I get a little nostalgic now and then.  :-\
>> 
>> *The Imiev went out of production in 2019 (I think), but you can still find
>> a few new copies of the Peugeot Ion and Citroen C-Zero variants in the EU.
>> In 2021 they sold - drumroll - 18 of them.
>> 
>> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>> 
>> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
>> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> If you made a column of things you're pretty sure you know, and
>> then made another column of how you know those things, most of
>> that column is like: "Some guy told me." It's just clickbait
>> and hearsay.  Goes into the head, locks onto a feeling, you're
>> like: "That sounds good. I'm gonna tell other people that." And
>> that's how brand marketing works, and also fascism, we're
>> finding.
>> 
>> -- Marc Maron
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Why people dislike Tesla

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Well, I don’t have a Tesla, but I own a piece of the company. And people beyond 
non-owners raise the service question, as do stock analysts.

They come to your house because that is their service model. They have some 
service centers, but because the “mobile” model is not proving to be adequate, 
they will be building more service centers.

Particularly for new technologies, the customer experience is king. Bad 
experiences get spread around like wildfire, and are barriers in the way of 
vehicle uptake. You’ve even highlighted the issue yourself, being “tired of 
people who don’t own a Tesla saying Tesla has a service problem”.  Word 
spreads, and are a factor in buying decisions.

Glad that *you* had a good experience, but I’ll be bet that you don’t talk 
about it as much as someone with a wretched experience.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 23, 2022, at 6:09 AM, paul dove via EV  wrote:
> 
> I get real tired of people who don’t own a Tesla saying Tesla has a service 
> problem. Every company gets complaints and dealerships are notorious for bad 
> service and pushy salespeople. Heck, I can’t even get the Mitsubishi dealer 
> here to fix the I-MiEV. I bought one with a new battery and it would only go 
> 30 miles I had to go back 3 times and the third time I brought printed sheets 
> from their service manual on how to fix it. They finally did that time. 
> Toyota blew the engine on my friends Celica. Tesla is great, my experience 
> has been flawless. Had a seatbelt recall. They came to the house and fixed it 
> I’m my garage. What dealer would do that? I had a headlamp go out. Again they 
> came to my house. I had to get an alignment and new tires. They were done in 
> 4 hours and gave me Uber credits to drive around Nashville while I waited. 
> 
> 
> Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> 
> 
> On Sunday, May 22, 2022, 7:52 PM, Collin Kidder via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> It also should be noted that Tesla increasingly has competition. It
> may be true that something like a Chevy Bolt is not quite the car a
> Model S is but it does have a radio (satellite radio even),
> potentially bose sound, and it drives basically just as far as a Model
> S does. Tesla has long had a service problem. Compare that to Chevy
> where I bought a 2022 Bolt and it had a noise problem that is known.
> There is a service bulletin about it. I got it right in for service,
> they fixed the noise, I got it back. There was no difficulty in doing
> this. GM may have a lot of old sins to account for but they know how
> to be a car company. Sooner or later Tesla will need to learn how to
> be a car company too or everyone else will eventually overtake them.
> 
>> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 8:17 PM Mark Abramowitz via EV
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> It’s the new paradigm, right?!
>> 
>> (I share your appalledness)
>> 
>> They are first movers in an industry, and with a great product. But this is 
>> disturbing, and they won’t ultimately succeed unless they fix this.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On May 20, 2022, at 1:30 PM, Ken Olum via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> We have a 2015 Model S that we bought used in December.  It's a nice car
>>> and suits our needs well.  But Tesla service is a horror.  Who ever
>>> heard of a car company where you can't call the service department on
>>> the phone?  Instead you have to use their app.  And when they break
>>> things, they don't take responsibility.
>>> 
>>> We had the car upgraded to LTE because 3G was discontinued.
>>> Simultaneously we had recall work done to replace the eMMC.  Ever since
>>> then, the GPS gives wildly wrong positions half the time, and about once
>>> a week the center console quits working and has to be rebooted.  Now
>>> they say we need to replace the MCU at the cost of $1500.  Repeated
>>> complaints at least got me a sympathetic human being, but not one with
>>> the authority to help me.  Finally he managed to get someone to agree to
>>> credit the $200 we'd paid for the LTE upgrade toward the MCU
>>> replacement, so it's only $1300 instead of $1500.  Since we don't have
>>> any other options, we agreed to pay.
>>> 
>>> And of course if we still want to be able to listen to the radio, it's
>>> another $500 for a tuner.  Apparently in this modern world you're
>>> supposed to do everything with your phone, so having a radio is an
>>> unusual option on which they want to make some money.
>>> 
>>> These attitudes on the part of the company are not endearing Tesla to
>>> their owners, or at least to us.
>>> 
>

Re: [EVDL] leaf heater switch

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I have a unique perspective, having played a role in the push for the original 
ZEV mandate in California, and think that it’s safe to say that Musk (and the 
original Tesla developers) pushed forward the “tipping point” on EVs by as much 
as decades.

His role, on several levels, has been unique, historical and successful.

That being said, there is much he has done that is despicable - his disrespect 
of and flaunting of the rule of law,  his treatment of his workers, his 
destruction of the communities where he locates his plants, and so on. Much, 
not all, of that has been a factor in Tesla’s profitability.

Not that I’ve not mentioned one thing yet about his personality.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 21, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> I agree. It's all subjective, of course. On the other hand, i think the real 
> question is "when."
> 
> Without Musk, I'm certain EVs would have eventually become a commercial 
> product. But compare this to the reduction in working at the office and 
> shopping in physical stores. Before COVID, the trend was evident. The shift 
> was certain to happen ...eventually. But COVID sharply accelerated the 
> change. Likewise, so did Musk.
> 
> Peri
> 
> From: Willie via EV 
> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 5:34 AM
> To: ev@lists.evdl.org
> Cc: Willie
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] leaf heater switch
> 
> 
>> On 5/20/22 13:29, EV List Lackey via EV wrote:
>>> On 19 May 2022 at 13:17, Willie via EV wrote:
>>> 
>>> I find it impossible to believe we would be where we are now without
>>> Tesla and Musk.  That is why I am so bumfuzzled by negativism toward
>>> both.
>> Hmm, I thought I'd answered that in past posts.  Sorry if it wasn't clear.
>> I'll try again, and I hope that others will have some thoughts too.
> Well I remain bumfuzzled.
> I just can not see from your viewpoint.  For decades, you and many of us 
> here have striven to promote adoption of EVs.   In the past ~10 years, 
> we have enjoyed astonishing success.  To most, it is clear that 
> Tesla/Musk is the near sole cause.  Yet you try to argue that it would 
> be happening in the absence of Tesla/Musk. And, you fault Musk not on 
> his accomplishments but on his personality.  Thereby 
> denying/refuting/ignoring those accomplishments.
> Personally, I find most auto advertising insulting.  I cite recent 
> Cadillac EV advertising that the Cadillac buyer can be "iconic" and all 
> sorts of vague meaningless terms.  Tesla is highly admirable in choosing 
> to let customers sell cars through honest evaluations.  With ZERO 
> advertising.  A very significant side effect is that Tesla has near zero 
> support from mainstream media.  That, because of the tremendous ad 
> revenues coming from traditional auto makers and dealers.   I do wish 
> Musk would be more circumspect in his public statements but I consider 
> that flaw to be dwarfed by his accomplishments.  But, Musk is savaged by 
> MSM and many are swayed by MSM, not really doing much independent thinking.
> On FSD: as others have pointed out, it is an option.  It need not be 
> bought or used if bought.  Despite all the negative MSM coverage, AP and 
> FSD statistics are that a driver using it is far less likely to have an 
> accident than a driver that does not use it.  I fail to understand how 
> critics remain critical in the face of such facts.
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Why people dislike Tesla

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

It’s the new paradigm, right?!

(I share your appalledness)

They are first movers in an industry, and with a great product. But this is 
disturbing, and they won’t ultimately succeed unless they fix this.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 20, 2022, at 1:30 PM, Ken Olum via EV  wrote:
> 
> We have a 2015 Model S that we bought used in December.  It's a nice car
> and suits our needs well.  But Tesla service is a horror.  Who ever
> heard of a car company where you can't call the service department on
> the phone?  Instead you have to use their app.  And when they break
> things, they don't take responsibility.  
> 
> We had the car upgraded to LTE because 3G was discontinued.
> Simultaneously we had recall work done to replace the eMMC.  Ever since
> then, the GPS gives wildly wrong positions half the time, and about once
> a week the center console quits working and has to be rebooted.  Now
> they say we need to replace the MCU at the cost of $1500.  Repeated
> complaints at least got me a sympathetic human being, but not one with
> the authority to help me.  Finally he managed to get someone to agree to
> credit the $200 we'd paid for the LTE upgrade toward the MCU
> replacement, so it's only $1300 instead of $1500.  Since we don't have
> any other options, we agreed to pay.
> 
> And of course if we still want to be able to listen to the radio, it's
> another $500 for a tuner.  Apparently in this modern world you're
> supposed to do everything with your phone, so having a radio is an
> unusual option on which they want to make some money.
> 
> These attitudes on the part of the company are not endearing Tesla to
> their owners, or at least to us.
> 
>Ken
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] EV USPO trucks

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

No, that’s just an email address.

Try here:

https://earthjustice.org/action/electrify-the-postal-service


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 27, 2022, at 11:12 AM, K O via EV  wrote:
> 
> Earthjustice is amplifing the  call to buy EV trucks for the POEarthjustice 
> Alerts I hope this links gets us there!choose 
> love,KO
> 
> I don't shop where I can't charge. 
> 
>On Tuesday, February 22, 2022, 01:07:37 PM PST, 
>  wrote:  
> 
> Send EV mailing list submissions to
> ev@lists.evdl.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ev-ow...@lists.evdl.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of EV digest..."
> 
> 
> Also, please be careful not to append the entire digest to your reply. Many 
> mail systems do this by default. Trim or delete the digest text from the 
> bottom of your message, and quote only the parts to which you're replying.
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: X-Bus (Lawrence Rhodes)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 22:21:57 + (UTC)
> From: Lawrence Rhodes 
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] X-Bus
> Message-ID: <1248287632.1187679.1645482117...@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> https://www.electrichybridvehicletechnology.com/news/buses-commercial-vehicles/xbus-modular-lightweight-electric-vehicle-nears-production.html
> 
>   The vehicle is very light and has good range. Not very fast. However if you 
> ever passed a VW van... what's the problem?. Lawrence Rhodes  
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> ___
> EV@lists.evdl.org
> For general EVDL support, see http://evdl.org/help/
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> 
> --
> 
> End of EV Digest, Vol 112, Issue 25
> ***
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] $7.5bn for ev charging stations across the US

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Please point to even one sign that this the case.  Among of investment? Number 
of models? Amount of marketing?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 12:30 PM, Willie McKemie via EV  wrote:
> 
> Tesla's goal is to hasten the adoption electric vehicles. The others goal
> is to delay adoption.
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 14:16 paul dove via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> The other car companies got the same tax credits as Tesla and they built
>> zero public chargers
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022, 10:15 AM, EV List Lackey via EV <
>> ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 12 Feb 2022 at 13:37, paul dove via EV wrote:
>>> 
>>> They should reimburse Tesla for their charging network if they're
>>> gonna put chargers in for all the other companies
>> 
>> I don't see why.  Tesla chose to bundle the cost of their exclusive,
>> private, proprietary charging into the $100k price of their early models.
>> 
>> I don't think that they should have been allowed to build Tesla-only EV
>> charging, any more than Ford and GM should have been allowed to build
>> filling stations for their own cars over a century ago.  Regardless, it
>> was
>> Musk's own free choice.
>> 
>> Besides, I'd argue that Tesla's Superchargers WERE indirectly subsidized,
>> through the EV purchase tax credits.
>> 
>> That said, I think that governments SHOULD have directly subsidized
>> Tesla's
>> charging network, AND required that it be open to ALL EVs with no
>> advantage
>> or preference for Teslas.  In fact I'd be fine with them doing that for
>> future Tesla stations.
>> 
>>> by the way I paid $200 a year tax on my electric vehicle in Alabama
>> 
>> They're punishing you for doing social good.  Typical tantrum for a
>> regressive, anti-EV, anti-environment government.  They should instead be
>> giving you a $200 yearly EV tax *credit* as a reward.
>> 
>> Optimum solution: move.  That way Alabama won't get ANY of your taxes.
>> 
>> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>> 
>> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
>> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>"My country, right or wrong" is a thing that no patriot would
>>think of saying except in a desperate case. It's like saying
>>"My mother, drunk or sober."
>> 
>>-- G K Chesterton
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20220212/8588a3a2/attachment.html
>>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Fast chargers are almost as profitable as gasoline pumps, claims BP executive

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Yep, big issue here.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 11:40 AM, Haudy Kazemi via EV  wrote:
> 
> One must be careful about looking at industrial rates. They generally have
> a separate energy fee and power (demand) fee. The energy fee can easily be
> far less than a fixed home rate...i.e. that 1/2 or 2/3s price.
> 
> But the demand fee can be enormous, as it is usually based on the 15 minute
> period of highest usage during the month. Charging an EV, like a Model S,
> at 100 kW for 15 minutes, means you will pay the demand charge as if you
> used 100 kW continuously for the whole month, even though you only used it
> for 15 minutes (25 kWh).
> 
> Storage is the main way to mitigate demand fees. A few EV stations have on
> site storage just for this reason.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 13:29 Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Interesting article.
>> 
>> Your info on rates, though, may be where you are, but not everywhere.  I
>> can’t tell you what the rates are here, but know that chargers get
>> subsidized rates.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:38 AM, Mark Hanson via EV 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Since fast chargers are connected to a 480 3 phase industrial feed,
>> they generally get the industrial rate, less than the 12.6cents residential
>> rate (typically 1/2-2/3rds residential) Tesla then charges 28-35cents per
>> KWh and VW (Electrify America) 43cents per KWh.
>>> 
>> https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1134762_fast-chargers-are-almost-as-profitable-as-gasoline-pumps-claims-bp-executive
>>> Stay Charged,
>>> Mark in Roanoke
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20220212/f47a80fc/attachment.html>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Fast chargers are almost as profitable as gasoline pumps, claims BP executive

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Interesting article.

Your info on rates, though, may be where you are, but not everywhere.  I can’t 
tell you what the rates are here, but know that chargers get subsidized rates.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:38 AM, Mark Hanson via EV  wrote:
> 
> Since fast chargers are connected to a 480 3 phase industrial feed, they 
> generally get the industrial rate, less than the 12.6cents residential rate 
> (typically 1/2-2/3rds residential) Tesla then charges 28-35cents per KWh and 
> VW (Electrify America) 43cents per KWh.  
> https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1134762_fast-chargers-are-almost-as-profitable-as-gasoline-pumps-claims-bp-executive
> Stay Charged,
> Mark in Roanoke
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] $7.5bn for ev charging stations across the US

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I would agree that there would only be a modest amount of congestion “at this 
time”. 

But BEVs will be flooding the market over the next few years, and that will be 
short-lived. Can they expand the network quick enough, while maintaining the 
same level of performance, reliability, etc?  

Maybe, but remember that everything is not within their control. There will be 
substantial power needs, leaving them at the mercy of the power utilities. The 
slowness and lack of responsiveness of the utilities in California have been a 
big issue in trying to deploy the technology.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 8:00 AM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 2/12/22 10:39 AM, Steves via EV wrote:
>> Tesla has the infrastructure there already. Why not piggyback onto their 
>> network. Pay Tesla to add a few chargers for other cars at each of their 
>> stations. Be relatively cheap that way. And yes it’s promoting a charging 
>> monopoly, but they do have a great system.
> 
> The SuperCharger network TOWERS over the competition in all ways you can 
> think of: siting, maintenance, reliability, ease of billing/payment, charge 
> speed, pervasiveness.
> 
> IMHO, Tesla is waiting for congress to specify exactly how Tesla would 
> benefit from opening the network.  Most likely, "opening" will be via 
> adapters rather than additional cables.  Many Tesla drivers fear congestion 
> should the SC network be opened.  That view is offset by the fact that Tesla 
> is, by far, the best selling EV.  That is, opening the network will have 
> trigger only a modest amount of congestion at this time.  The infusion of 
> cash from additional charging sales would enable Tesla to greatly expand the 
> SC network.  Tesla has a great reputation for putting SCs where they are 
> needed and for increasing the capacity of SCs with big demands.
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] $7.5bn for ev charging stations across the US

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I would guess that they would have to apply for the funds, which may be 
allocated to the states for distribution.  But I haven’t looked at the bill, 
and it may all be undecided right now.

Monopoly? Maybe.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 7:39 AM, Steves via EV  wrote:
> 
> Tesla has the infrastructure there already. Why not piggyback onto their 
> network. Pay Tesla to add a few chargers for other cars at each of their 
> stations. Be relatively cheap that way. And yes it’s promoting a charging 
> monopoly, but they do have a great system. 
> 
> -Steve
> 
>> On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:22 AM, Mark Abramowitz via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Weren’t the cost of those chargers incorporated into the purchase price of 
>> the vehicles?
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Feb 12, 2022, at 6:19 AM, paul dove via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> They should reimburse Tesla for their charging network if they’re gonna 
>>> put chargers in for all the other companies  by the way I paid $200 a year 
>>> tax on my electric vehicle in Alabama
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Friday, February 11, 2022, 5:16 PM, jamie via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A couple of relevant data points:
>>> 
>>> -Biden recently publicly credited Tesla as America's leading EV 
>>> manufacturer. Yes, it took a while, but that talking point is over. 
>>> Meanwhile we'll see if Ford, VW, GM, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan and others can 
>>> catch up, as their new models arrive.
>>> 
>>> -The government is also making people who do not support fossil fuels 
>>> pay for fossil fuel tax breaks and cleanups.
>>> 
>>> As a wider view, perhaps the thinking is that supporting nation-wide 
>>> transportation initiatives offers benefits for overall American 
>>> competitiveness, which benefits everyone. Even while recognizing that 
>>> each subset in the transportation universe may not currently have 
>>> individual support or direct use by every single person.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> On 2/11/22 3:22 PM, Willie via EV wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/11/22 5:04 PM, nathan christiansn via EV wrote:
>>>>> The only problem that I see with this is that the government is making
>>>>> people who do not support ev’s pay for ev charging. I say that we wait 
>>>>> for
>>>>> mass ev adoption to happen(which will happen very soon). After this,
>>>>> businesses and apartment building owners will pay for ev charging 
>>>>> stations
>>>>> out of their own pocket because having ev charging as an amenity will
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] $7.5bn for ev charging stations across the US

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Weren’t the cost of those chargers incorporated into the purchase price of the 
vehicles?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2022, at 6:19 AM, paul dove via EV  wrote:
> 
> They should reimburse Tesla for their charging network if they’re gonna put 
> chargers in for all the other companies  by the way I paid $200 a year tax on 
> my electric vehicle in Alabama
> 
> 
> Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> 
> 
> On Friday, February 11, 2022, 5:16 PM, jamie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> A couple of relevant data points:
> 
> -Biden recently publicly credited Tesla as America's leading EV 
> manufacturer. Yes, it took a while, but that talking point is over. 
> Meanwhile we'll see if Ford, VW, GM, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan and others can 
> catch up, as their new models arrive.
> 
> -The government is also making people who do not support fossil fuels 
> pay for fossil fuel tax breaks and cleanups.
> 
> As a wider view, perhaps the thinking is that supporting nation-wide 
> transportation initiatives offers benefits for overall American 
> competitiveness, which benefits everyone. Even while recognizing that 
> each subset in the transportation universe may not currently have 
> individual support or direct use by every single person.
> 
> Cheers,
>   -Jamie
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2/11/22 3:22 PM, Willie via EV wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2/11/22 5:04 PM, nathan christiansn via EV wrote:
>>> The only problem that I see with this is that the government is making
>>> people who do not support ev’s pay for ev charging. I say that we wait 
>>> for
>>> mass ev adoption to happen(which will happen very soon). After this,
>>> businesses and apartment building owners will pay for ev charging 
>>> stations
>>> out of their own pocket because having ev charging as an amenity will

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] $7.5bn for ev charging stations across the US

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

As far as I know, the charging business cannot yet be profitable without 
subsidies. 

If anyone has any contrary data, I would welcome it.  If there is any data 
showing WHEN it might be profitable, I would be happy to see that, too.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 11, 2022, at 2:22 PM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 2/11/22 5:04 PM, nathan christiansn via EV wrote:
>> The only problem that I see with this is that the government is making
>> people who do not support ev’s pay for ev charging. I say that we wait for
>> mass ev adoption to happen(which will happen very soon). After this,
>> businesses and apartment building owners will pay for ev charging stations
>> out of their own pocket because having ev charging as an amenity will
>> attract more customers/tenants. Some hotels are already starting to do this.
>> 
>> A government that is 28 trillion dollars in debt should not be spending
>> billions of dollars that it does not hav
> ABSOLUTELY!  In addition, government contributions are not needed and any 
> government money would  almost certain to be misspent. Examples abound.  
> Tesla has the charging problems solved.  Compare SuperChargers with EVGO and 
> the VW system.  All Tesla needs is a small fraction of the money that Biden 
> wants to spend.  Tesla knows the charging problem and how best to solve it.  
> Instead, Biden wastes his efforts denying the existence of Tesla while 
> proclaiming the EV dominance of GM.  Why does Biden expect credibility?
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Testing Teslas New Full Self Driving FSD, NOT ready for prime time

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Multiple computers?

“ Feb 7 (Reuters) - Tesla Inc (TSLA.O)decided to remove one of the two 
electronic control units included in the steering racks of some made-in-China 
Model 3 and Model Y cars to meet fourth-quarter sales goals while coping with 
global chip shortage, CNBC reported on Monday.”

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/tesla-cut-steering-component-some-cars-deal-with-chip-shortage-cnbc-2022-02-08/

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 8, 2022, at 1:19 PM, mark hanson via EV  wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark etc,
> 
> 
> 
> Fundamentally: There's really *too* many variables to do FSD (full self
> driving) safely.  
> 
> 
> 
> I just got back from Blacksburg, VA, professor Dave's Tesla-3 with the
> *latest* as of 2-8-22 self driving software to show off.  We let it drive us
> around Blacksburg (about 30 minutes) and it got confused, *stuck* in a
> round-a-bout, another road T, had to give it some accel and then made a left
> turn *almost hitting* a big black truck head-on (Dave jerked the steering
> wheel thankfully).  Going back through the neighborhood, someone popped out
> between two parked vehicles on the side of the road and it almost clipped
> her.  Due droplets on the cameras (or mud) can cause intermittent issues
> I've found.  It's a great EV but Tesla needs to drop this self driving
> thing, not worth having live folks as experiments.  
> 
> 
> 
> I thought with multiple computers drop out issues would be solved, but now
> I'm convinced after seeing firsthand actual FSD errors not to pay the extra
> (now $12K I was just told) to be part of Elon's experiment.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> The other Mark Hanson
> 
> 
> 
> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 08:43:29 + (UTC)
> 
> From: Mark Laity-Snyder 
> 
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
> 
> Subject: [EVDL] Fw: Request Tesla crash data
> 
> Message-ID: <1430018246.579166.1644309809...@mail.yahoo.com>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> 
> 
> Mark:? Thanks for this.? I am not sure if it will help.? I agree with you
> that Tesla should have two or even 3 computers for full self driving.? If
> one were to glitch out, that is all that is preventing you or many others
> from being injured or killed.? Tesla has a 5 star safety rating.? So the
> passengers and driver will probably be ok but bystanders be aware.
> 
> EVDL: ?I am the guy Mark was talking about.??Story time!? So my wife got in
> the 1st Tesla accident.? FSD was on and she was driving.? She was fiddling
> with the sound system (or something) on the lovely screen that practically
> begs you to play with it and we were on a road we don't often go down.? It
> happened to be a T intersection with a stop sign.? She saw the stop sign too
> late and ran into a short wall.? This was before FSD registered stop signs
> and would have slowed down for a stop sign.? Such is our luck.? On the 2nd
> Tesla accident, I can't remember the details leading to the accident since I
> sustained a pretty bad head injury (enough to cause double vision for 6
> months).? However we saw the dash cam footage which shows the car just
> driving off the road.? No change in speed or course correction.? I was given
> many tests after the accident to rule out some physical problem that may
> have caused me to lose consciousness.? There was no smoking gun that would
> say "Yes he lost consciou  sness because...".? I am lucky Tesla has that 5
> star safety rating because other than the double vision I had no lasting
> injuries.? The people who were going to move the vehicle wanted to cut the
> vehicle at the battery.? Fortunately someone realized it was a Tesla and
> didn't do that which would have started a runaway fire.??
> 
> So lessons learned are exactly what folks have said about losing focus.? FSD
> is very good ALMOST all the time.? In that one case out of 1000+ the human
> must be ready to take over in a split second. I am still very hopeful for
> FSD to be solved. If any company can do it it will be Tesla at this point
> since they have the most data.? I think the super computer is just used for
> training the cars to get better and the more data they have the faster that
> will happen.? Waymo has a lovely system that only works in the geofenced
> area that is premapped and safe.? ?I agree with Lawrence that cameras should
> be all that is needed.? Radar was probably giving false signals.? Then there
> is question of priority.? The cameras see all clear but the radar sees
> something else like a leaf or snow or a rabbit.? Which one has priority???
> 
> I am not sure where my focus was but it was not where it needed to be.? I
> was out of work for over 8 months and now I can't afford to replace the
> Tesla.? It is a great car.? Even after all that, I would probably get FSD
> again especially since it is improving so rapidly.? It is like having a
> front row seat watching our computer overlords take their first steps before
> they take over our lives.
> 
> 
> 
>   - Forwarded 

Re: [EVDL] OT: US traffic controls (was: tesla's sneaky rolling stops)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

That is fascinating.

I hate most traffic circles, and think them dangerous. But if the data is 
showing otherwise…

BTW, sign location is usually based on an engineering study, and there are 
federal standards that states must be mostly compliant with - then again, some 
prefer to make stuff up than rely on an accepted protocol.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 1, 2022, at 4:13 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Incidentally, in Seattle, most residential streets don't have stop signs.
> 
> "Crash data show there are far more accidents at intersections in Seattle 
> with stop signs than without. ... Which brings us to traffic circles, an 
> approach that reduces collisions by 97 percent." from
> https://www.kuow.org/stories/stop-signs-arent-all-theyre-cracked-be-seattle
> 
> Peri
> 
> 
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Bill Dube via EV" 
> To: ev@lists.evdl.org
> Cc: "Bill Dube" 
> Sent: 01-Feb-22 15:48:05
> Subject: [EVDL] OT: US traffic controls (was: tesla's sneaky rolling stops)
> 
>>Tesla should treat a stop sign according to the law. However, the 
>> computer is acting logically according to the actual situation. I would 
>> suspect that there logically should be a yield sign instead of the stop sign.
>> 
>> In most civilized parts of the world, stop signs are _extremely_ scarce. In 
>> the US, they are the default at most intersections. I can only recall seeing 
>> half a dozen stop signs in all of Auckland. No doubt there are more, but 
>> they are used sparely because they are needed extremely rarely.
>> 
>> I suspect this is to  generate revenue in the form of traffic tickets in the 
>> US. Only in the US do the ticket revenues go directly to the police 
>> departments. In most civilized countries, they go to the national coffers, 
>> which removes (most) of the obvious conflict of interest.
>> 
>> Obviously, someone has to yield the right of way to someone else at an 
>> intersection. In sensible countries, they use "yield" signs. Only in the few 
>> intersections that have visibility difficulties, or some unusual hazard do 
>> they place the very rare stop sign. They often don't have any signs at all, 
>> where you apply whoever standard yield law/procedure. It all works 
>> wonderfully with few traffic accidents. Traffic flows much more smoothly and 
>> efficiently with yield signs instead of stop signs.
>> 
>>When folks in the US do a rolling stop (often called a Hollywood stop,) 
>> they are doing the logical thing. They have slowed sufficiency to ensure 
>> that they can proceed without violating the right-of-way.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Bill D.
>> 
>>> On 2/2/2022 11:39 AM, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:
>>> Ok, my opinion.  I think one should look at the intent of the law requiring 
>>> a full stop at a stop sign. From what I learned, that is to allow getting a 
>>> full view of the intersection before proceeding. If you don't come to a 
>>> full stop, you might not notice a pedestrian starting to cross. Or, if the 
>>> cross traffic doesn't stop, you might miss an oncoming vehicle.
>>> 
>>> So, for human drivers, a full stop makes sense.
>>> 
>>> In the future, good sensors and self-driving software should be able to 
>>> determine if a full stop is necessary. The software can look in all 
>>> directions at once and doesn't need nearly as much time as a human to make 
>>> a decision. If the view of cross traffic is blocked, it will need to be 
>>> ready to stop, but may not need to completely stop once at the 
>>> intersection. I can imagine that full stops and, perhaps, even stop signs 
>>> themselves will eventually become relics.
>>> 
>>> In the mean time, I think Tesla's should obey the law. Once Musk can prove 
>>> his vehicles don't have to fully stop, maybe he can lobby to get laws 
>>> changed.
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] OT: US traffic controls (was: tesla's sneaky rolling stops)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

No, not to generate traffic tickets.  There are safety standards, based on 
traffic volume, accidents, etc, that determine where they go.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 1, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> Tesla should treat a stop sign according to the law. However, the 
> computer is acting logically according to the actual situation. I would 
> suspect that there logically should be a yield sign instead of the stop sign.
> 
> In most civilized parts of the world, stop signs are _extremely_ scarce. In 
> the US, they are the default at most intersections. I can only recall seeing 
> half a dozen stop signs in all of Auckland. No doubt there are more, but they 
> are used sparely because they are needed extremely rarely.
> 
> I suspect this is to  generate revenue in the form of traffic tickets in the 
> US. Only in the US do the ticket revenues go directly to the police 
> departments. In most civilized countries, they go to the national coffers, 
> which removes (most) of the obvious conflict of interest.
> 
> Obviously, someone has to yield the right of way to someone else at an 
> intersection. In sensible countries, they use "yield" signs. Only in the few 
> intersections that have visibility difficulties, or some unusual hazard do 
> they place the very rare stop sign. They often don't have any signs at all, 
> where you apply whoever standard yield law/procedure. It all works 
> wonderfully with few traffic accidents. Traffic flows much more smoothly and 
> efficiently with yield signs instead of stop signs.
> 
> When folks in the US do a rolling stop (often called a Hollywood stop,) 
> they are doing the logical thing. They have slowed sufficiency to ensure that 
> they can proceed without violating the right-of-way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bill D.
> 
>> On 2/2/2022 11:39 AM, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:
>> Ok, my opinion.  I think one should look at the intent of the law requiring 
>> a full stop at a stop sign. From what I learned, that is to allow getting a 
>> full view of the intersection before proceeding. If you don't come to a full 
>> stop, you might not notice a pedestrian starting to cross. Or, if the cross 
>> traffic doesn't stop, you might miss an oncoming vehicle.
>> 
>> So, for human drivers, a full stop makes sense.
>> 
>> In the future, good sensors and self-driving software should be able to 
>> determine if a full stop is necessary. The software can look in all 
>> directions at once and doesn't need nearly as much time as a human to make a 
>> decision. If the view of cross traffic is blocked, it will need to be ready 
>> to stop, but may not need to completely stop once at the intersection. I can 
>> imagine that full stops and, perhaps, even stop signs themselves will 
>> eventually become relics.
>> 
>> In the mean time, I think Tesla's should obey the law. Once Musk can prove 
>> his vehicles don't have to fully stop, maybe he can lobby to get laws 
>> changed.
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] tesla's sneaky rolling stops

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I could create a model to reproduce the sound…

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Feb 1, 2022, at 1:51 PM, Mark Grasser via EV  wrote:
> 
> But if you read how It works, it only does the rolling stop if no other cars
> are at the intersection. So the question is this. If no one is in the forest
> and a tree falls, does it make a sound?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of EV List Lackey via
> EV
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2022 1:19 PM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Cc: EV List Lackey
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] tesla's sneaky rolling stops
> 
>> On 1 Feb 2022 at 17:36, paul dove via EV wrote:
>> 
>> Dangerous trend to me. Why should your car make you follow the law?
> 
> Would you really want your car to cause you to BREAK the law?  Because 
> that's what Tesla's rolling stop is doing.  
> 
> This "feature" hardly surprising from Elon Musk, who's demonstrated that he 
> doesn't think that laws apply to him.
> 
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
> 
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
> 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their 
> homes electrical energy too cheap to meter.
> 
>   -- Lewis Strauss, Atomic Energy Commission, 1954
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] [GGEVA] CPUC meeting via the web. Concerning expensive fees to kill solar.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

A good cause, but suboptimal in light of a raging pandemic.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jan 5, 2022, at 2:49 PM, cleanair--- via EV  wrote:
> 
> A gathering in front of the SF CPUC office is scheduled to protest the 
> increase.Hope to see some familiar faces.
> Danny
> --
> 2) Join us on January 13th in Los Angeles and San Francisco. The news media 
> is our best megaphone. They covered our 300-foot long Huntington Beach sand 
> protest and our 200-person human billboard in Sacramento. Now we want to 
> stage a 1,000+ demonstration of consumers, solar workers and community 
> leaders to send the ultimate SOS message to our Governor: "Save Our Solar". 
> Sign up
> --
> Save Our Solar Rally - San Francisco (CPUC Building) and Los Angeles 
> (Pershing Square) January 13 at 11 a.m.
> 
> Stand up for your right to make energy from the sun!
> 
> | 
> | 
> | 
> |  |  |
> 
> |
> 
> |
> | 
> |  | 
> Stand up for your right to make energy from the sun!
> 
> You have the right to make solar energy on your property, without 
> unreasonable interference by the utility or th...
> |
> 
> |
> 
> |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] CPUC meeting via the web. Concerning expensive fees to kill solar.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I think that you are mistaken.

The comment period ends mid-month, and then there will be a round of reply 
comments.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jan 5, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
> Please do your part to complain about these proposed fees. If this goes 
> through, what is the point of having solar...I will disconnect from the grid 
> and get batteries. 
> https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/events-and-meetings/cpuc-voting-meeting-01-13-2022 
> This is the link for a meeting of the CPUC over proposed fees for owning and 
> connecting solar to the grid. A lot of buried information that must be sorted 
> through.  Below links to contact board members which is not obvious. Lawrence 
> Rhodes
> 
> https://apps.cpuc.ca.gov/apex/f?p=401%3A56%3A0%3A%3ANO%3ARP%2C57%2CRIR%3AP5_PROCEEDING_SELECT%3AR2008020
>  comment link. Couldn't figure it out. 
> Parties: https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/servicelists/R2008020_88217.htm
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

[EVDL] EVs Can Save 30% in Costs at Three Years, Study Says

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

 I thought the comments about the other study were a bit over the top (FUD? 
Really?), but this study has a different conclusion, though it is regarding 
commercial use.

A different level of detail, perhaps. 

For those that had any of the number of legitimate gripes with the assumptions, 
I’d urge sending those to the authors, as well as to other appropriate forums. 
The levels of detail was just too good to toss out, even tho use some wacky 
assumptions skewed the results.

https://www.greenfleetmagazine.com/10155068/evs-can-save-30-in-costs-at-three-years-study-says?utm

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] (no subject)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I had to actually look (skim) at the study.  It appears to be a serious look, 
and is the first of a series on the “EV transition”, so they will do more, and 
much of you will have to pay for.

They do *exclude* some costs, so it could be criticized for that, but at least 
they are transparent in their methodology. That lends itself to making 
intelligent criticisms (Iike their cost numbers on Level 1 chargers), and 
repeating the analysis with different assumptions.

As far as Level 1, they acknowledge that most vehicles come with that. They 
amortize the cost over five years (seems a bit short to me, but I don’t know 
how often they fail). They assume that if you mostly charge at home, you will 
install Level 2, with an annual cost of $320 .

$120/year is for level 1 - my guess is that they assume that even if you get it 
with car, you are still paying for it, though if the retail replacement cost is 
$600, using that number seems excessive. I’m guessing on this, and perhaps a 
closer look would provide more clarity. But there is nothing to prevent you 
from going back and subtracting out that annual cost.

In my opinion, even if you don’t like the assumptions, if you’re into this kind 
of analysis, this is a serious effort, and worthwhile for assessing and 
modifying the very detailed methodology.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 24, 2021, at 12:15 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 
> Message: 6
> 
> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 17:22:08 -0700
> 
> From: Mark Abramowitz 
> 
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
> 
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not
> 
> so free press.
> 
> Message-ID: 
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> 
> 
> I know nothing about Level 1 charger costs, so did a quick Google, found this:
> 
> 
> 
> https://blog.carvana.com/2021/07/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-an-ev-charger/
> 
> 
> 
> ? For example, the Level 1 charger costs between $300 to $600 before labor, 
> which stands at about $1,000 to $1,700.?
> 
> 
> 
> Is this wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> - Mark
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Fossil Fuel powered iPhone
> 
> Very wrong. For one thing level one evse are standard OEM equipment that 
> comes with the car. Most garages have a level one plug which is the same plug 
> a cell phone, toaster or lamp would use. No one would permanently install a 
> level one EVSE. I don't bother permanently installing my level 2 EVSE. If you 
> needed level one they are about $175 on eBay. If you looked you could 
> probably find one cheaper. That's why I was out when she said $600 for level 
> 1. That is absurd. Lawrence Rhodes 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not so free press.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

So *that’s* where the $600 comes from.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 23, 2021, at 5:50 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> Every EV sold in the USA includes a level 1 EVSE that simply plugs into a 
> standard 120V outlet.  Some of these will even work plugged into 240V and 
> charge twice as fast.
> 
> Replacement cost for a level-1 EVSE from the manufacturer is typicaly around 
> $600, but their are NUMEROUS cheaper level 1 EVSEs available.
> 
> Most people who want to hard wire an EVSE opt for level-2 (typically in the 
> 3kw to 9.6kw range)
> 
> I have some Level 2 EVSEs, but I haven't gotten around to wiring them in yet 
> because level-1 works good enough for us right now.
> 
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> October 23, 2021 5:22 PM, "Mark Abramowitz via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> I know nothing about Level 1 charger costs, so did a quick Google, found 
>> this:
>> 
>> https://blog.carvana.com/2021/07/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-an-ev-charger
>> 
>> “ For example, the Level 1 charger costs between $300 to $600 before labor, 
>> which stands at about
>> $1,000 to $1,700.”
>> 
>> Is this wrong?
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Oct 23, 2021, at 4:10 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> She lost me on $600 level 1 charger(EVSE) Lawrence Rhodes
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20211023/b2388b1a/attachment.html>
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not so free press.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Not in L.A..

In California, 50% of the population live in multi-unit housing. How many can 
reasonably charge at home? I don’t know.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 23, 2021, at 5:42 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> I'll grant you that there might be a few urban drivers that can't charge at 
> home.  
> However, in big Cities like NY, many(most?) of the urbanites don't have ANY 
> cars, relying instead on public transportation, taxis, walking, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> October 23, 2021 2:40 PM, "Matthew Pitts via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> Rural and suburban drivers might have the option to charge at home, and 
>> there might be businesses
>> willing to allow employees to charge at work, but for urban EV owners, 
>> public charging may in fact
>> be the only option. Just my opinion, though.
>> 
>> Matthew Pitts
>> 
>> ⁣Get BlueMail for Android ​
>> 
>>> On Oct 23, 2021, 4:28 PM, at 4:28 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> EV's are charged while parked (usually at home or at work), not at
>>> public chargers.
>>> I have a new argument.
>>> 
>>> Comparing a gas car and EV exclusively limited to public chargi9ng
>>> could equally be applied to comparing a gas car and EV exclusively
>>> limited to home refueling. Imagine having to walk to a gas station
>>> every night to get a few gallons for the tank at home!
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 2:28 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV
>>>  wrote:
 https://amp.freep.com/amp/6110815001 Take onto consideration this is
>>> 
>>> coming from ICE country in more than one way. I will comment on
>>> Twitter. Lawrence Rhodes
 -- next part --
 An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
 URL:
>>> 
>>> 
 ___
 Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
 No other addresses in TO and CC fields
 UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
 ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
 LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not so free press.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Thank you.

I didn’t think you needed installation of a Level 1 charger, so was a bit 
confused when I saw the article. Appreciate the clarification.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 23, 2021, at 5:30 PM, Jay Summet via EV  wrote:
> 
> Level 1 chargers typically plug into a standard 120v  15A outlet, and 
> require no installation. They typically cost between $180-$300.
> 
> The numbers below are more accurate for a 240v volt hard wired level 2 
> charger, which can cost in the $300-$700 range, and installation of a new 
> circuit/outlet/hardwiring can be between $400-$1,700 depending upon size, 
> distance from the existing panel, etc...
> 
> Jay
> 
>> On 10/23/21 8:22 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:
>> I know nothing about Level 1 charger costs, so did a quick Google, found 
>> this:
>> https://blog.carvana.com/2021/07/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-an-ev-charger/
>> “ For example, the Level 1 charger costs between $300 to $600 before labor, 
>> which stands at about $1,000 to $1,700.”
>> Is this wrong?
>> - Mark
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>>>> On Oct 23, 2021, at 4:10 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> She lost me on $600 level 1 charger(EVSE) Lawrence Rhodes
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20211023/b2388b1a/attachment.html>
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not so free press.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I know nothing about Level 1 charger costs, so did a quick Google, found this:

https://blog.carvana.com/2021/07/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-an-ev-charger/

“ For example, the Level 1 charger costs between $300 to $600 before labor, 
which stands at about $1,000 to $1,700.”

Is this wrong?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 23, 2021, at 4:10 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
> She lost me on $600 level 1 charger(EVSE) Lawrence Rhodes
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Michigan still spouting FUD. From the Detroit not so free press.

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I grew up in Detroit, and delivered the Detroit Free Press (usually zero 
emission, by foot or bicycle). The paper is mainstream, but you’re right - ICE 
country. At least it *was* a few years ago.  The OEMs there are going full EV, 
so there’s no reason to post FUD.

And the numbers, while the bottom line numbers are surprising, sound relatively 
similar to numbers I’ve seen else elsewhere, from credible sources. They 
includes numbers not only included, but also not usually included because of 
subsidies that the consumer doesn’t always see.



- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 23, 2021, at 11:28 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> https://amp.freep.com/amp/6110815001 Take onto consideration this is coming 
> from ICE country in more than one way. I will comment on Twitter. Lawrence 
> Rhodes
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

[EVDL] BEV Vehicle to Home

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I’m one of those that generally don’t see a good use case for BEV vehicle to 
home, but I think that you have perfectly defined a beautiful use case where it 
makes perfect sense.

Thanks for the post.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Oct 3, 2021, at 7:30 PM, Tim Economu via EV  wrote:
> 
> " I said that. Lost power for three days back in the 90's when a tornado 
> blew through. Not worth investing a lot of money for 3 days every 25 years."
> 
> That seems like a quaint world view to me. "I don't need it so no one else 
> does either" .
> 
> We have lived in rural America for the past 40 years and power is not so 
> consistent in a lot of places here in the US. We lose power every year 
> numerous times, for varying amounts of hours and days. I don't use fossil 
> fuels much anymore, so backup generators are not an option, and are a poor 
> option for those that do use fossils in my opinion. But I do have solar power 
> and a small battery bank, so recharging during a power outage is possible and 
> is necessary if we want to maintain power for water,refrigeration, 
> electronics, and fresh air inside our passive house.
> 
> To have an EV that will provide not only transportation but occasional power 
> is not a little thing, it's huge. Especially if you can recharge during the 
> sunny day. To have jobsite power is even bigger.
> 
> I do realize that it might be something that some people do not think is 
> worth spending money. But there are a lot of us out here that it would be 
> worth spending quite a lot of for that option. If it came as part of the 
> package, all the better.
> 
> I happen to believe that vehicle to grid is a game changer, kind of like 
> Level 5 autonomy will be a game changer.
> Tim Economu
> Whidbey Island
> 
>> On 10/3/2021 1:07 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
>> Send EV mailing list submissions to
>>ev@lists.evdl.org
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>ev-ow...@lists.evdl.org
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of EV digest..."
>> 
>> 
>>  Also, please be careful not to append the entire digest to your reply. Many 
>> mail systems do this by default. Trim or delete the digest text from the 
>> bottom of your message, and quote only the parts to which you're replying.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>>1. Re: Include in events: "EV to power your home" (Peter VanDerWal)
>>2. Re: Include in events: "EV to power your home" (Robert Bruninga)
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2021 16:58:46 +
>> From: "Peter VanDerWal" 
>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Include in events: "EV to power your home"
>> Message-ID: 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> 
>>> I said that. Lost power for three days back in the 90's when a tornado blew 
>>> through. Not worth
>>> investing a lot of money for 3 days every 25 years.
>> I agree it's not worth buying an EV JUST to use it as a backup power source. 
>>  However, most people buy EVs to drive.  When deciding which EV to buy, one 
>> that has the capability of powering your house in an emergency situation 
>> might just be a deciding factor for many people.
>> 
>> FWIW I moved my critical loads (Fridge/Freezer, HVAC, etc.) to a new 
>> subpanel with a transfer switch so that I could power my critical loads from 
>> my EVs during a power outage.
>> Once we go off-grid this setup will allow me to get by with a smaller house 
>> battery. Even if we get an extended period of low sunshine, either of my EVs 
>> could power my critical loads for a week or two, which is more than long 
>> enough wait out the stormy weather.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2021 14:25:42 -0400
>> From: Robert Bruninga 
>> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Include in events: "EV to power your home"
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>> 
>> I believe we have discussed this and that you do have some kinda
>> justification for "going off grid", but for others, it makes no economic
>> sense to me.If I generate all my power, I am still perfectly happy to
>> pay $8 a month for keeping the grid accouint.  Kinda like
>> insurance..
>> 
>> The last thing I want to do in life is maintain batteries for the
>> rest of my life.   Out of the blue I took a life changing hit in my
>> health and cannot possibly maintain all the special "features"
>> I have built into the house for "fun" but now, impossible to
>> maintain by my wife.  I am an ardent DIY guy, but now am
>> a CDIMA (Cant do it myself Anymore). - Bob
>> 
>> On Sun, 

Re: [EVDL] J.B. Straubel in the news - Move making cathodes from Asia to the USA

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I really don’t know.

I don’t follow those efforts.

I think the place to find more is on the California Energy Commission website, 
or just Google “Lithium Commission.” 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Sep 14, 2021, at 9:41 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Sounds good. How does that work ? Do they pump the water through some sort 
> of catalyst that can extract lithium ?
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> ------ Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> Sent: 14-Sep-21 20:45:29
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] J.B. Straubel in the news - Move making cathodes from 
> Asia to the USA
> 
>> California is looking to “produce” its own lithium supplies, from the Salton 
>> Sea. They’ve formed a Commission (a good friend of mine is on it) to oversee 
>> it, and I’m hopeful that appropriate environmental safeguards will be in 
>> place.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Sep 14, 2021, at 5:46 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Very ambitious. Can Straubel et al do it ? I presume he can front a lot of 
>>> money, so that helps. And I presume he's not really inventing anything. 
>>> Perhaps the biggest challenge will be sourcing raw materials. The finished 
>>> product (batteries) is environmentally clean but strip mining is another 
>>> matter.
>>> 
>>> Exciting. Best of luck !
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>>> 
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "cleanair--- via EV" 
>>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>>> Cc: "clean...@sbcglobal.net" 
>>> Sent: 14-Sep-21 15:35:52
>>> Subject: [EVDL] J.B. Straubel in the news - Move making cathodes from Asia 
>>> to the USA
>>> 
>>>> Lets support a tsunami of battery cathodes made in the USA.This should be 
>>>> of strategic interest.
>>>> Danny A.
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.mining.com/web/a-tesla-co-founder-aims-to-build-an-entire-us-battery-industry/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Redwood Materials Inc., the battery recycling company created by Tesla 
>>>> Inc. co-founder J.B. Straubel, has been keeping a big secret: It isn’t 
>>>> really a recycling company.
>>>> 
>>>> Sure, Redwood has risen quickly to become the biggest lithium-ion battery 
>>>> recycler in the U.S.. But Straubel didn’t leave Tesla in 2019 just to 
>>>> clean out America’s junk drawers. His broader goal, described to Bloomberg 
>>>> for the first time, is to move a huge chunk of the battery-component 
>>>> industry from Asia to the U.S.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> “It’s both inspiring and terrifying to see so many nations and car 
>>>> companies announcing their shift to electric vehicles,” Straubel said. 
>>>> “But there’s a massive gap in what needs to happen.”
>>>> 
>>>> To fill that gap, Straubel has set out to build one of the largest battery 
>>>> materials factories in the world. Redwood, which currently operates three 
>>>> facilities in Nevada, is searching for a location farther east to build a 
>>>> new million-square-foot factory. At a cost of well over $1 billion, 
>>>> according to Straubel, the addition will enable Redwood to become a major 
>>>> U.S. producer of cathodes. (Every battery has two electrodes — an anode 
>>>> and a cathode — between which trillions of charged lithium atoms travel. 
>>>> It’s the cathode that largely determines a battery’s cost, performance and 
>>>> environmental footprint.)
>>>> 
>>>> Straubel says the U.S. factory will produce material for 100 gigawatt 
>>>> hours of batteries a year by the end of 2025. That’s enough for about 1.3 
>>>> million long-range vehicles a year, on par with the biggest producers in 
>>>> Asia. By 2030, the same facility will ramp up to 500 gigawatt hours a 
>>>> year, he says. At today’s prices, that’s $25 billion of cathodes a year. 
>>>> Redwood plans to build a similar operation in Europe by 2023.
>>>> 
>>>> “These numbers sound insane, but when you look at what the market needs, 
>>>> I’m like holy cow — is this even aggress

Re: [EVDL] J.B. Straubel in the news - Move making cathodes from Asia to the USA

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

California is looking to “produce” its own lithium supplies, from the Salton 
Sea. They’ve formed a Commission (a good friend of mine is on it) to oversee 
it, and I’m hopeful that appropriate environmental safeguards will be in place.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Sep 14, 2021, at 5:46 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Very ambitious. Can Straubel et al do it ? I presume he can front a lot of 
> money, so that helps. And I presume he's not really inventing anything. 
> Perhaps the biggest challenge will be sourcing raw materials. The finished 
> product (batteries) is environmentally clean but strip mining is another 
> matter.
> 
> Exciting. Best of luck !
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "cleanair--- via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "clean...@sbcglobal.net" 
> Sent: 14-Sep-21 15:35:52
> Subject: [EVDL] J.B. Straubel in the news - Move making cathodes from Asia to 
> the USA
> 
>> Lets support a tsunami of battery cathodes made in the USA.This should be of 
>> strategic interest.
>> Danny A.
>> 
>> https://www.mining.com/web/a-tesla-co-founder-aims-to-build-an-entire-us-battery-industry/
>> 
>> 
>> Redwood Materials Inc., the battery recycling company created by Tesla Inc. 
>> co-founder J.B. Straubel, has been keeping a big secret: It isn’t really a 
>> recycling company.
>> 
>> Sure, Redwood has risen quickly to become the biggest lithium-ion battery 
>> recycler in the U.S.. But Straubel didn’t leave Tesla in 2019 just to clean 
>> out America’s junk drawers. His broader goal, described to Bloomberg for the 
>> first time, is to move a huge chunk of the battery-component industry from 
>> Asia to the U.S.
>> 
>> 
>> “It’s both inspiring and terrifying to see so many nations and car companies 
>> announcing their shift to electric vehicles,” Straubel said. “But there’s a 
>> massive gap in what needs to happen.”
>> 
>> To fill that gap, Straubel has set out to build one of the largest battery 
>> materials factories in the world. Redwood, which currently operates three 
>> facilities in Nevada, is searching for a location farther east to build a 
>> new million-square-foot factory. At a cost of well over $1 billion, 
>> according to Straubel, the addition will enable Redwood to become a major 
>> U.S. producer of cathodes. (Every battery has two electrodes — an anode and 
>> a cathode — between which trillions of charged lithium atoms travel. It’s 
>> the cathode that largely determines a battery’s cost, performance and 
>> environmental footprint.)
>> 
>> Straubel says the U.S. factory will produce material for 100 gigawatt hours 
>> of batteries a year by the end of 2025. That’s enough for about 1.3 million 
>> long-range vehicles a year, on par with the biggest producers in Asia. By 
>> 2030, the same facility will ramp up to 500 gigawatt hours a year, he says. 
>> At today’s prices, that’s $25 billion of cathodes a year. Redwood plans to 
>> build a similar operation in Europe by 2023.
>> 
>> “These numbers sound insane, but when you look at what the market needs, I’m 
>> like holy cow — is this even aggressive enough?” Straubel says. “Somebody’s 
>> got to do this. In fact, we need at least four companies doing similarly 
>> aggressive, crazy things all in the same timeline.”
>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] LIVE stream 8/31/21 1540 PST A physicist consultant to power utilities on how the EV mass adoption is affecting the

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I would check either an annual report, or a report from the spring, when most 
of the curtailments occur. I don’t know the details…

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Sep 1, 2021, at 3:40 PM, Haudy Kazemi via EV  wrote:
> 
> Here is the daily CAISO report.
> 
> http://www.caiso.com/PublishedDocuments/WindSolarCurtailmentReport.pdf
> 
> It shows that the vast majority of curtailment events is due to local
> system congestion, and not because of demand.
> 
> I expect that remotely-positioned MW-scale solar farms are much more
> susceptible to congestion issues than rooftop solar. I'm also not sure that
> rooftop-scale solar supports curtailment.
> 
> On-site production allows for on-site self consumption, without tieing up a
> capacity on the local/regional grid. On-site production with storage
> further increases the time period where a site can operate without
> depending on the local/regional grid.
> 
> Energy storage at the production sites would improve the match between
> production supply and transmission capacity.
> 
> Energy storage near customers would improve the match between distribution
> capacity and customer demand.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, 12:41 Mark Abramowitz via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Southern California commonly sends its excess to Arizona - sometimes we
>> have to pay them to take it. Every year we curtail lots of renewables.
>> CaISO tracks how much.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Sep 1, 2021, at 10:15 AM, Jan Steinman via EV 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: "Peri Hartman" mailto:pe...@kotatko.com>>
>>>> 
>>>> If, for example, southern cali has excess
>>>> PV generation, it will need to ship that energy somewhere pretty far
>>>> away, say oregon or washington. That would require a pretty substantial
>>>> transmission line. I don't think the existing lines are sufficient.
>>> 
>>> The Pacific Intertie is a 600,000 volt DC line that stretches from
>> Washingon to SoCal. I think it can handle enough power for a minor city.
>>> 
>>> Jan
>>> 
>>> -- next part --
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL: <
>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210901/4bbebd8d/attachment.html
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210901/107361e8/attachment.html>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] LIVE stream 8/31/21 1540 PST A physicist consultant to power utilities on how the EV mass adoption is affecting the

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I didn’t scroll far enough on my phone.

In the spring, when most occurs, it’s mostly “Economic”, either local or 
systemwide.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Sep 1, 2021, at 4:56 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> I would check either an annual report, or a report from the spring, when 
> most of the curtailments occur. I don’t know the details…
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Sep 1, 2021, at 3:40 PM, Haudy Kazemi via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Here is the daily CAISO report.
>> 
>> http://www.caiso.com/PublishedDocuments/WindSolarCurtailmentReport.pdf
>> 
>> It shows that the vast majority of curtailment events is due to local
>> system congestion, and not because of demand.
>> 
>> I expect that remotely-positioned MW-scale solar farms are much more
>> susceptible to congestion issues than rooftop solar. I'm also not sure that
>> rooftop-scale solar supports curtailment.
>> 
>> On-site production allows for on-site self consumption, without tieing up a
>> capacity on the local/regional grid. On-site production with storage
>> further increases the time period where a site can operate without
>> depending on the local/regional grid.
>> 
>> Energy storage at the production sites would improve the match between
>> production supply and transmission capacity.
>> 
>> Energy storage near customers would improve the match between distribution
>> capacity and customer demand.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, 12:41 Mark Abramowitz via EV  wrote:
>>> Southern California commonly sends its excess to Arizona - sometimes we
>>> have to pay them to take it. Every year we curtail lots of renewables.
>>> CaISO tracks how much.
>>> - Mark
>>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>>>> On Sep 1, 2021, at 10:15 AM, Jan Steinman via EV 
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> From: "Peri Hartman" mailto:pe...@kotatko.com>>
>>>>> If, for example, southern cali has excess
>>>>> PV generation, it will need to ship that energy somewhere pretty far
>>>>> away, say oregon or washington. That would require a pretty substantial
>>>>> transmission line. I don't think the existing lines are sufficient.
>>>> The Pacific Intertie is a 600,000 volt DC line that stretches from
>>> Washingon to SoCal. I think it can handle enough power for a minor city.
>>>> Jan
>>>> -- next part --
>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> URL: <
>>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210901/4bbebd8d/attachment.html
>>>> ___
>>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210901/107361e8/attachment.html>
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] LIVE stream 8/31/21 1540 PST A physicist consultant to power utilities on how the EV mass adoption is affecting the

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Southern California commonly sends its excess to Arizona - sometimes we have to 
pay them to take it. Every year we curtail lots of renewables. CaISO tracks how 
much.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Sep 1, 2021, at 10:15 AM, Jan Steinman via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> From: "Peri Hartman" mailto:pe...@kotatko.com>>
>> 
>> If, for example, southern cali has excess 
>> PV generation, it will need to ship that energy somewhere pretty far
>> away, say oregon or washington. That would require a pretty substantial 
>> transmission line. I don't think the existing lines are sufficient.
> 
> The Pacific Intertie is a 600,000 volt DC line that stretches from Washingon 
> to SoCal. I think it can handle enough power for a minor city.
> 
> Jan
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Charging EVs was Re: hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Hopefully you saw some places to find the information you wanted in my 
follow-up post.

Use the data how you see fit, draw your own conclusions. I just want to see 
people use accurate information.

But the “wha-a-a” moment was when I saw that you drive a hybrid. Why on earth 
would you drive a hybrid? There are plenty of EV options out there, INCLUDING 
FCEVs! Some of us like clean air, chief!

You’re complaining about FCEV efficiency while you’re running an ICE motor?!  
LOL!


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 9:42 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> You are definitely in great shape for at-home charging. Hopefully that is 
>> usually sufficient for
>> you.
> 
> We bought the Chevy Volt in 2017 and the Chevy Bolt in 2019.  
> 
> I have never paid to charge the Volt,  mostly it gets charged at home but 
> occasionally it gets charged using one of the thousands of free Level-2 
> charging stations.
> 
> We have driven the Volt up to Oregon a couple times to visit my mom (~1500 
> miles each way) and I have driven out to San Jose a couple times (~900 
> miles). My wife an I are both in our late fifties so we no longer like to do 
> marathon driving trips, so we typically only drive 8-10 hours a day one long 
> trips. Our criteria for selecting hotels is that they offer free EV charging, 
> which is actually becomming pretty common these days.  We almost always stop 
> in Blyth for an hour or two to take a break and use the free charger there, 
> and usually stop somewhere between LA and Sacremento to take a break and use 
> one of the free chargers there.
> On the trips to my mom's only about 200 miles (each way) is done on electric, 
> the rest of the trip uses about 30 gallons of gas (each way)  
> On the trips to San Jose each way is about 120-130 miles on electric and 
> about 19 gallons of gas.
> I haven't tried these trips with the Bolt yet because the DC fast chargers 
> needed to get from Phoenix to California weren't installed until last year.
> 
> However, I have driven the bolt to Phoenix and back(190 miles each way) once 
> and numerous times to Tucson and back (90 miles each way)
> In the 2 years I've owned the Bolt I have only twice paid to charge it.  Once 
> just to see how it worked to use a DC fast charger, and a second time because 
> I drove up to the Tucson Airport expecting to park it there and charge for 
> free using level-1 charging (plenty fast enough for a 2-3 day trip) only to 
> have the trip rescheduled at the last minute and I didn't have enough charge 
> to get back home, so I spent ~10 minutes and  $5 using the DC fast charger 
> near the airport rather than spending a couple hours using a free level-2 
> charger.
> 
>> On the hydrogen side, the $16.50 price was correct in 2019. 
> The article I got that number from was pusblish in late 2020, can you offer a 
> link to anything proving your claim?
> 
>> The price is NOT subsidized by California. 
> The cost of fuel normally includes the cost to recoup the cost of building 
> the station, since California paid for 80% of the Station they ARE 
> subsidizing the cost of the fuel.
> 
>> With the newer stations and greater competition they are starting to come 
>> down and will
>> come down.
> Again, can you offer any proof of that?
> 
>> But the consumer doesn’t pay that, with one exception. They pay nothing for 
>> three years.
> 
> All Teslas sold before 2017 come with lifetime free supercharging, model S 
> and X come with lifetime free supercharging.  , model 3 and Y come with 1 
> year of free supercharging.  Destination charger (level 2) are almost always 
> free.
> VW comes with 3 years of free charging, the Ionic comes with 1 year of free 
> charging, I believe Nissan used to offer free charging.
> This is in addition to the thousands of EV charging stations that are free to 
> everyone.
> A far as I can tell, every state in the Union has at least 50 free charging 
> stations, most have several hundred.
> 
>> The OEMs pick that up, and offer even more perks to the “pioneers” (things 
>> like free car rentals).
>> Most lease, but if you bought, like I did for my first one, it becomes 
>> expensive after three years.
>> 
>> 
>> The cost of stations *is* subsidized by California (as is EVSE), but the 
>> stations are not costing
>> $2 million. I think the earlier ones did, but costs are coming down. My 
>> guess is the last group of
>> funded stations were $1.25M per station with four times the fueling bays, 
>> and 5-10 times the fuel
>> capacity of the previous ones. That’s an educated guess, but the recent 
>> numbers are out there.
>> 
>> The amount of subsidy, in %, has also dropped significantly. I think it’s 
>> only 40%, but don’t trust
>> my memory.
> 
> Again, the $2 million figure, with $1.6 million subsidy was from an artical 
> publishdd last year, can you offer any proof of your claims?
> 
>> 
>> Your use of cost of electricity per station (which seems *very* 

Re: [EVDL] Cost of PV EV charging

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

How much do you pay when you charge away from home?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 10:09 AM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/25/21 11:10 AM, Robert Bruninga via EV wrote:
 ...by Electrify America, they said that they charge 31¢/kWh.
>> I have seen rates as low as 3 cents per kW
>> for EV charging off-peak for those  that sign up for a TOU plan
>> (includes much higher peak rates)
>> 
>> "Hydrogen Fool cell" is a reasonable moniker.
>> 
>> Wont this thread ever die?
> 
> ->I<- think it is time for it to die.
> 
> Much discussion back and forth.  Little logic.  Little promise for the 
> future.  Not a single example of FCEV advantage over BEV. I say at risk of 
> appearing to gang up on Mark.  Even though I have resisted giving that 
> appearance.
> 
>> OOps, forgot.  My home solar makes the EV charging free...
>> (Well, no, with Grid tie it costs me 14 cents per kWh
>> because that is what each kW is worth that I push back
>> into the grid so using it to charge an EV is 14cents/kWh lost).
> 
> Your utility seems to be giving you a GREAT deal.  Though it makes your 
> charging appear more expensive than with a lesser deal.  I buy at $.10/kwh 
> and sell at $.06/kwh which makes my charging $.06.  OTOH, my utility is 
> willing to buy (pay cash) for as much as I can manage to produce.  Even at 
> only $.06, I think my payback period is in the range of 6-8 years.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Fast Charging Rates on the Least coast

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Do they price differently in different markets? Or does this have to do with 
price of gasoline?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 12:30 PM, Mark Hanson via EV  wrote:
> 
> Hi folks
> I’m charging along the least coast with the Tesla 28c per kWh and the Bolt 
> with CCS electrify America at 42c per kWh.  Not sure why the CCS level 3 is 
> so much higher, still much less than hydrogen per mile. 
> Best regards 
> Mark
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I don’t know.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 2:39 AM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> Where and who is building them ?
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 3:30 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> One other update on subsidies for stations - some new stations are being
>> built *without* state funding.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:11 PM, Mark Abramowitz 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Let me give you sources for the exact numbers for up to date data,
>> rather than rely on my memory.
>>> 
>>> On station cost and the % amount that the subsidy has dropped, you can
>> either go to the CEC website, and look at the latest funding awards, or you
>> can look at a summary put together by the California Fuel Cell Partnership.
>> CaFCP does regular station update webinars, and the latest was several
>> weeks ago. You can likely download the slide deck from their website (cited
>> by you earlier) for some good summaries, or listen to the webinar for more
>> color.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - Mark
>>> 
>>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:02 PM, Mark Abramowitz 
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> You are definitely in great shape for at-home charging. Hopefully that
>> is usually sufficient for you.
>>>> 
>>>> On the hydrogen side, the $16.50 price was correct in 2019. The price
>> is NOT subsidized by California. With the newer stations and greater
>> competition they are starting to come down and will come down. But the

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

- See my note about the capacity of fueling stations being built today. Your 
number is no longer correct.

- the needed infrastructure ratio  makes me neither happy nor unhappy. They 
just are what they are, but you need to adjust comparisons based on that, as 
you have done (I’m not commenting on whether your methodology is correct or 
incorrect. I don’t have an opinion on that). Your numbers just need to use 
current numbers.

The infrastructure for FCEV  does make me unhappy, and again, in the real world 
it can be fine, depending on whether it meets your needs. For me and my family, 
most it has. Elsewhere, it doesn’t, as you point out. In most of those places, 
you won’t be able to get a vehicle.

Irrelevant to the consumer, because it can’t help them, there is actually 
infrastructure out there that could allow a cross country trip. It you had 
access to the hydrogen fueling infrastructure in distribution warehouses across 
the country, you could make it across the country. You can’t, but it just shows 
that it can be built. Just like Tesla did it. Or the country in the 50’s when 
the interstate system was built. 


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 2:28 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> In regard to your question “ How is comparing the number of stations that 
>> are ACTUALLY open not an
>> "apples to apples" comparison?” - If you are trying to compare how many 
>> vehicles you have the
>> capacity to serve, there is not a one to one match. A hydrogen fueling 
>> “spot” can refuel many more
>> cars, provide fuel for many more miles…however you want to measure it. Put 
>> another way, if you were
>> to built the “right” number of charging stations for a million BEVs, and 
>> then assumed that the
>> amount for BEVs would be the same number as for a million FCEVs, you would 
>> be dead wrong. Hope that
>> my point was clearer.
> 
> The hydrogen fuel stations they are installing in California can produce 
> about 180 kg of hydrogen a day, in the real world that is enough for 
> 10,000-11,000 miles.  
> While not all of the 40,000 EV charging stations can match that, there are 
> hundreds that can exceed that rate on a daily basis.  Almost all of the DC 
> fast chargers they have been installing for the last year or two can exceed 
> that.
> If it makes you happy then the infrastructure advantage is only 100:1 instead 
> of 1,000:1
> 
>> 
>> But my earlier point was that, as an individual consumer, if you have 
>> adequate H2 infrastructure
> 
> Yes, but I was asking about in the real world, not pipe dreams.  Right now, 
> outside of California, there is essentially zero infrastructure for FCEV and 
> that is not likely to change any time soon.
> So, in the real world, consumers outside of california are not going to buy 
> FCEVs, and not a whole lot of them inside of california are buying into them 
> either.
> 
> In the real world there is currently enough infrastructure to make a trip in 
> one of the recent model EVs from pretty much anywhere in the USA to pretty 
> much anywhere else.
> There isn't currently enough hydrogen infrastructure to even reach all points 
> in California.  I suppose you could drive from LA into Arizona a little bit 
> before you ran out of hydrogen, but then you'd have to hire someone to haul 
> the vehicle back to LA.
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

One other update on subsidies for stations - some new stations are being built 
*without* state funding.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:11 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> Let me give you sources for the exact numbers for up to date data, rather 
> than rely on my memory.
> 
> On station cost and the % amount that the subsidy has dropped, you can either 
> go to the CEC website, and look at the latest funding awards, or you can look 
> at a summary put together by the California Fuel Cell Partnership. CaFCP does 
> regular station update webinars, and the latest was several weeks ago. You 
> can likely download the slide deck from their website (cited by you earlier) 
> for some good summaries, or listen to the webinar for more color.
> 
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:02 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
>> 
>> You are definitely in great shape for at-home charging. Hopefully that is 
>> usually sufficient for you.
>> 
>> On the hydrogen side, the $16.50 price was correct in 2019. The price is NOT 
>> subsidized by California. With the newer stations and greater competition 
>> they are starting to come down and will come down. But the consumer doesn’t 
>> pay that, with one exception. They pay nothing for three years. The OEMs 
>> pick that up, and offer even more perks to the “pioneers” (things like free 
>> car rentals). Most lease, but if you bought, like I did for my first one, it 
>> becomes expensive after three years. 
>> 
>> The cost of stations *is* subsidized by California (as is EVSE), but the 
>> stations are not costing $2 million. I think the earlier ones did, but costs 
>> are coming down. My guess is the last group of funded stations were $1.25M 
>> per station with four times the fueling bays, and 5-10 times the fuel 
>> capacity of the previous ones. That’s an educated guess, but the recent 
>> numbers are out there.
>> 
>> The amount of subsidy, in %, has also dropped significantly. I think it’s 
>> only 40%, but don’t trust my memory.
>> 
>> Your use of cost of electricity per station (which seems *very* cheap) isn’t 
>> the right number to use, as most hydrogen is not produced at the station. If 
>> you are assuming the electricity rates that you may know at charging 
>> stations (a guess on my part), I think that would be wrong anyway, because I 
>> think that EVSE get special rates that electrolyzers don’t get.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
 On Aug 24, 2021, at 10:29 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
 wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 
 Also, since we are talking about the consumers perspective, I think you 
 are making common mistake
 in equating cost with price.
 
 Going back to your comment about cost of charging, that has to be based on 
 price, not cost. At a
 recent presentation by Electrify America, they said that they charge 
 31¢/kWh. 
>>> 
>>> Yes I know price and cost are two different things, however, the average 
>>> consumer considers them to be the same thing.
>>> 
>>> While there are thousands of free charging stations (especially in 
>>> California), including DC fast charge stations, and while there are several 
>>> EV producers that offer free charging for several years with new EVs, we 
>>> will ignore those.
>>> 
>>> For the charging stations that require payment, I have seen everywhere from 
>>> ~$0.20 to $0.55 per kwh, $0.31 seems to be an average price.  I suspect 
>>> competition will start driving the price down in some areas.
>>> 
>>> Of course the majority of EV owners charge at home, where electricity is 
>>> much cheaper.  My solar has already paid for itself twice over, so my 
>>> price/cost is essentially zero.  I haven't paid an electric bill in 11 
>>> years.
>>> 
>>> According to: https://cafcp.org/content/cost-refill 
>>> The average price of hydrogen in California is $16.51 per kg, which can 
>>> power an FCEV "up to" 75 miles.  This price is heavily subsidized by 
>>> California.  In addition the state pays on average $1.6 million of the $2 
>>> million, for each station.
>>> 
>>> Using the EPA rated range on my Chevy Bolt (the 'up to' range is much 
>>> higher), and using the $0.31 price per kwh, the price to go 75 miles is ~ 
>>> $6.80.
>>> For the average EV driver in California charging at home, and paying the 
>>> average price for electricity, it would price would be about $4.00.
>>> Then again, many places in California offer special rates for charging EVs 
>>> where it's even cheaper.
>>> 
>>> So, the price for charging an EV ranges from infinitely cheaper to, perhaps 
>>> half the cost of Hydrogen.
>>> 
 And you haven’t said anything about cost of renewables, and isn’t that 
 what we want?
>>> 
>>> Since it requires 3x-4x as much electricity to power the FCEV, which means 
>>> it requires 3x-4x as much renewable infrastructure to fuel a FCEV.  Pretty 
>>> sure I have mentioned this 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Let me give you sources for the exact numbers for up to date data, rather than 
rely on my memory.

On station cost and the % amount that the subsidy has dropped, you can either 
go to the CEC website, and look at the latest funding awards, or you can look 
at a summary put together by the California Fuel Cell Partnership. CaFCP does 
regular station update webinars, and the latest was several weeks ago. You can 
likely download the slide deck from their website (cited by you earlier) for 
some good summaries, or listen to the webinar for more color.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:02 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> You are definitely in great shape for at-home charging. Hopefully that is 
> usually sufficient for you.
> 
> On the hydrogen side, the $16.50 price was correct in 2019. The price is NOT 
> subsidized by California. With the newer stations and greater competition 
> they are starting to come down and will come down. But the consumer doesn’t 
> pay that, with one exception. They pay nothing for three years. The OEMs pick 
> that up, and offer even more perks to the “pioneers” (things like free car 
> rentals). Most lease, but if you bought, like I did for my first one, it 
> becomes expensive after three years. 
> 
> The cost of stations *is* subsidized by California (as is EVSE), but the 
> stations are not costing $2 million. I think the earlier ones did, but costs 
> are coming down. My guess is the last group of funded stations were $1.25M 
> per station with four times the fueling bays, and 5-10 times the fuel 
> capacity of the previous ones. That’s an educated guess, but the recent 
> numbers are out there.
> 
> The amount of subsidy, in %, has also dropped significantly. I think it’s 
> only 40%, but don’t trust my memory.
> 
> Your use of cost of electricity per station (which seems *very* cheap) isn’t 
> the right number to use, as most hydrogen is not produced at the station. If 
> you are assuming the electricity rates that you may know at charging stations 
> (a guess on my part), I think that would be wrong anyway, because I think 
> that EVSE get special rates that electrolyzers don’t get.
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 10:29 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Also, since we are talking about the consumers perspective, I think you are 
>>> making common mistake
>>> in equating cost with price.
>>> 
>>> Going back to your comment about cost of charging, that has to be based on 
>>> price, not cost. At a
>>> recent presentation by Electrify America, they said that they charge 
>>> 31¢/kWh. 
>> 
>> Yes I know price and cost are two different things, however, the average 
>> consumer considers them to be the same thing.
>> 
>> While there are thousands of free charging stations (especially in 
>> California), including DC fast charge stations, and while there are several 
>> EV producers that offer free charging for several years with new EVs, we 
>> will ignore those.
>> 
>> For the charging stations that require payment, I have seen everywhere from 
>> ~$0.20 to $0.55 per kwh, $0.31 seems to be an average price.  I suspect 
>> competition will start driving the price down in some areas.
>> 
>> Of course the majority of EV owners charge at home, where electricity is 
>> much cheaper.  My solar has already paid for itself twice over, so my 
>> price/cost is essentially zero.  I haven't paid an electric bill in 11 years.
>> 
>> According to: https://cafcp.org/content/cost-refill 
>> The average price of hydrogen in California is $16.51 per kg, which can 
>> power an FCEV "up to" 75 miles.  This price is heavily subsidized by 
>> California.  In addition the state pays on average $1.6 million of the $2 
>> million, for each station.
>> 
>> Using the EPA rated range on my Chevy Bolt (the 'up to' range is much 
>> higher), and using the $0.31 price per kwh, the price to go 75 miles is ~ 
>> $6.80.
>> For the average EV driver in California charging at home, and paying the 
>> average price for electricity, it would price would be about $4.00.
>> Then again, many places in California offer special rates for charging EVs 
>> where it's even cheaper.
>> 
>> So, the price for charging an EV ranges from infinitely cheaper to, perhaps 
>> half the cost of Hydrogen.
>> 
>>> And you haven’t said anything about cost of renewables, and isn’t that what 
>>> we want?
>> 
>> Since it requires 3x-4x as much electricity to power the FCEV, which means 
>> it requires 3x-4x as much renewable infrastructure to fuel a FCEV.  Pretty 
>> sure I have mentioned this several times already.
>> 
>>> 
>>> I recently saw a chart of cost of renewables by geographic region in the 
>>> U.S. that showed the cost
>>> of renewables to be available for as low as 2 or 3¢/kWh.
>>> 
>>> Plug Power (disclosure: a client of mine) has said publicly that they 
>>> believe that they can produce
>>> hydrogen within a 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You are definitely in great shape for at-home charging. Hopefully that is 
usually sufficient for you.

On the hydrogen side, the $16.50 price was correct in 2019. The price is NOT 
subsidized by California. With the newer stations and greater competition they 
are starting to come down and will come down. But the consumer doesn’t pay 
that, with one exception. They pay nothing for three years. The OEMs pick that 
up, and offer even more perks to the “pioneers” (things like free car rentals). 
Most lease, but if you bought, like I did for my first one, it becomes 
expensive after three years. 

The cost of stations *is* subsidized by California (as is EVSE), but the 
stations are not costing $2 million. I think the earlier ones did, but costs 
are coming down. My guess is the last group of funded stations were $1.25M per 
station with four times the fueling bays, and 5-10 times the fuel capacity of 
the previous ones. That’s an educated guess, but the recent numbers are out 
there.

The amount of subsidy, in %, has also dropped significantly. I think it’s only 
40%, but don’t trust my memory.

Your use of cost of electricity per station (which seems *very* cheap) isn’t 
the right number to use, as most hydrogen is not produced at the station. If 
you are assuming the electricity rates that you may know at charging stations 
(a guess on my part), I think that would be wrong anyway, because I think that 
EVSE get special rates that electrolyzers don’t get.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 10:29 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Also, since we are talking about the consumers perspective, I think you are 
>> making common mistake
>> in equating cost with price.
>> 
>> Going back to your comment about cost of charging, that has to be based on 
>> price, not cost. At a
>> recent presentation by Electrify America, they said that they charge 
>> 31¢/kWh. 
> 
> Yes I know price and cost are two different things, however, the average 
> consumer considers them to be the same thing.
> 
> While there are thousands of free charging stations (especially in 
> California), including DC fast charge stations, and while there are several 
> EV producers that offer free charging for several years with new EVs, we will 
> ignore those.
> 
> For the charging stations that require payment, I have seen everywhere from 
> ~$0.20 to $0.55 per kwh, $0.31 seems to be an average price.  I suspect 
> competition will start driving the price down in some areas.
> 
> Of course the majority of EV owners charge at home, where electricity is much 
> cheaper.  My solar has already paid for itself twice over, so my price/cost 
> is essentially zero.  I haven't paid an electric bill in 11 years.
> 
> According to: https://cafcp.org/content/cost-refill 
> The average price of hydrogen in California is $16.51 per kg, which can power 
> an FCEV "up to" 75 miles.  This price is heavily subsidized by California.  
> In addition the state pays on average $1.6 million of the $2 million, for 
> each station.
> 
> Using the EPA rated range on my Chevy Bolt (the 'up to' range is much 
> higher), and using the $0.31 price per kwh, the price to go 75 miles is ~ 
> $6.80.
> For the average EV driver in California charging at home, and paying the 
> average price for electricity, it would price would be about $4.00.
> Then again, many places in California offer special rates for charging EVs 
> where it's even cheaper.
> 
> So, the price for charging an EV ranges from infinitely cheaper to, perhaps 
> half the cost of Hydrogen.
> 
>> And you haven’t said anything about cost of renewables, and isn’t that what 
>> we want?
> 
> Since it requires 3x-4x as much electricity to power the FCEV, which means it 
> requires 3x-4x as much renewable infrastructure to fuel a FCEV.  Pretty sure 
> I have mentioned this several times already.
> 
>> 
>> I recently saw a chart of cost of renewables by geographic region in the 
>> U.S. that showed the cost
>> of renewables to be available for as low as 2 or 3¢/kWh.
>> 
>> Plug Power (disclosure: a client of mine) has said publicly that they 
>> believe that they can produce
>> hydrogen within a few years that will be competitive with diesel, given 
>> access to 3¢ solar. They
>> are currently building a number of production plants.
> Most hydrogen fuel stations only pay 5-7¢ per kWh, so that won't make a 
> significant drop it the cost.
> The cost of fuel is more than just the price of the electricity, under normal 
> circumstances it would include recouping the cost of building the station, 
> labor costs, repair costs, etc.
> Currently California is paying 80% of the cost of installing the Hydrogen 
> fuel station, with local cities, etc. pay most of the remaining. 
> I don't believe those costs are being reflected in the sales price of the 
> Hydrogen.  Since it's not sustainable for the state to continue to subsidize 
> the fuel stations much longer, I would expect 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Ok - we disagree about the date to use. I was just using CARB’s analysis and 
the dates they pick. But it really doesn’t matter.

On number of stations, you repeat exactly what I said, that the 2020 numbers 
are a projection. It had to be, 2020 wasn’t over. But everything prior was an 
actual number. I took issue with your statement that there were only five 
additional stations since 2017. In 2018 alone, there were more than than five 
new stations.

And the DOE numbers you cite reflect an increase of many, many more than five 
new stations since 2017.

In regard to your question “ How is comparing the number of stations that are 
ACTUALLY open not an "apples to apples" comparison?” - If you are trying to 
compare how many vehicles you have the capacity to serve, there is not a one to 
one match. A hydrogen fueling “spot” can refuel many more cars, provide fuel 
for many more miles…however you want to measure it. Put another way, if you 
were to built the “right” number of charging stations for a million BEVs, and 
then assumed that the amount for BEVs would be the same number as for a million 
FCEVs, you would be dead wrong. Hope that my point was clearer.

I wasn’t making a point as to which was better or not for infrastructure.

But yes, currently the infrastructure for FCEVs is more under built than it is 
for BEVs.

But my earlier point was that, as an individual consumer, if you have adequate 
H2 infrastructure for you, it’s not a disadvantage.  Granted, because of the 
limited infrastructure currently, those consumers in the US for whom it would 
work fine is very small. In California, much less so. But still not an optimal 
situation. But it worked fine for my wife, for me, and for my son because we 
had infrastructure near where we work (or on the way), near we live or both.

Your point about subsidies was correct, but my point was actually about 
*government* subsidies, and the 5:1 was BEVcharging:FCEVfueling.

As far as self-sufficiency, you may be correct, but I’ve seen no information 
about the BEV side. I’m not talking about the individual, but the industry. How 
soon can the industry be self-sufficient, meaning without government subsidies 
for infrastructure? What’s the pathway to a successful charging industry?

Lastly, while I remain hopeful about fueling at home, I’m not holding breathe 
that I will be able to do so economically in the near future. I don’t think 
that’s a fruitful discussion on the FCEV side. 

On the BEV side, that’s a big advantage IF it works for you both economically 
and practically. When I tried to purchase a RAV4-EV, it must have worked for 
me, but by the time I bought my first FCEV, it wouldn’t have. 

It *is* possible that even if it didn’t work well for me, I still would have 
bought it and made do, given my involvement in the field.

In case it’s not clear, I’m just trying to correct incorrect information,and 
NOT weigh in on your question. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 9:26 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> You want to define it in your way, fine, know know that the industry and the 
>> state look at it
>> differently. Despite the marketing PR of the OEMs.
>> 
>> “Modern” batteries - We differ on definition of modern EV versus not. I view 
>> the not- modern ones
>> to be the ones that were common in the late-1800s to the early 1900s.
>> 
>> Besides the chemistry of the battery, how else do they differ? How would you 
>> view those BEVs or
>> fuel cells that use completely different chemistries?
> 
> Ok fine. Since a FCEV uses motors, controllers and batteries, that are 
> essentially the same as
> BEVs, that means that both FCEV and BEV have been under development for 
> exactly the same length of
> time, regardless of what start date you choose.
> If you want to separate out Fuel Cell developement, the first fuel cell was 
> developed a couple
> years before the first Lead-Acid battery and about 30 years before the first 
> EV.
> 
>> Number of stations - where did you find the incorrect numbers at DOE?
>> 
>> If you look at the above document, 31 stations in 2017, 39 in 2018, 44 in 
>> 2019, 58 in 2020 (given
>> date of document, this would have to be projected), and projected 2021 of 62.
> 
> That document CLEARLY states those are "projected" numbers.
> " The latest pre-COVID projections show that up to 58 stations may achieve 
> Open-Retail
> status by the end of 2020"
> 
> DOE's website shows a total of 53 stations currently active in the US and 
> Canada with 45 stations
> in California.
> https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_locations.html#/find/nearest?fuel=HY
> 
>> In comparing infrastructure numbers, what would be interesting is a 
>> comparison on an apples to
>> apples basis. What’s the fueling/recharging capacity that is equivalent? I 
>> know it’s been done
>> someplace.
> 
> How is comparing the number of stations that are ACTUALLY open not an "apples 
> to apples"
> comparison?
> 
> 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I have no idea whether any of your calcs or most assumptions are correct. 

But I’m not sure what “80%” number that you say I’ve referenced is. To what are 
you referring?

Also, since we are talking about the consumers perspective, I think you are 
making common mistake in equating cost with price.

Going back to your comment about cost of charging, that has to be based on 
price, not cost. At a recent presentation by Electrify America, they said that 
they charge 31¢/kWh. I don’t know what other vendors charge, or whether this is 
based on a sustainable business model, or just an “introductory” price. They 
did say (or at least I thought they said) that their pricing model is based on 
the price of gasoline, which I know will make some heads spin.

I will also point out, that if you are talking renewables, the cost of 
electricity varies significantly based on geography, time of day, etc.. 
Averages vary for geographic regions.

And you haven’t said anything about cost of renewables, and isn’t that what we 
want?

I recently saw a chart of cost of renewables by geographic region in the U.S. 
that showed the cost of renewables to be available for as low as 2 or 3¢/kWh.

Plug Power (disclosure: a client of mine) has said publicly that they believe 
that they can produce hydrogen within a few years that will be competitive with 
diesel, given access to 3¢ solar. They are currently building a number of 
production plants.

Your DOE reference sounds very old, as it refers to a 2015 goal, when FCEVs 
were just getting in the road.

Recently, DOE announced a goal of $1.50/kg by 2030(?).

I hope that information helps. 


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> Okay, one last bite at the apple.
> 
> This quote came from a Wiki article:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water
> " Considering the industrial production of hydrogen, and using current
> best processes for water electrolysis (PEM or alkaline electrolysis)
> which have an effective electrical efficiency of 70–80%,[31][32][33]
> producing 1 kg of hydrogen (which has a specific energy of 143 MJ/kg)
> requires 50–55 kW⋅h (180–200 MJ) of electricity. At an electricity
> cost of $0.06/kW·h, as set out in the US Department of Energy hydrogen
> production targets for 2015,[34] the hydrogen cost is $3/kg."
> 
> There is the 80% that Mark has often mentioned.  There is the cost of
> electricity at $0.06/kwhr producing hydrogen using 50 kwh (the lower
> number in the range).  There is this statement from Toyota: "With a
> tank capacity of five kilos, the MIRAI achieves a range of 500 km."
> from this link: https://h2.live/en/fuelcell-cars/toyota-mirai/
> 
> So what happens when we crunch the numbers?
> 
> 500 km = 311 miles
> At full tank capacity, 5 kilos x 50 kwhr = 250 kwhr just to produce 5
> kg of hydrogen to go 311 miles.
> My Tesla Model 3 gets about 4 mile / kwhr on the open road.  4
> miles/kwhr x 250 kwhr = 1,000 miles.
> 
> The cost of electricity is $0.06/kwhr x 250 kwhr = $15.00
> 
> FCEV of 311 miles vs BEV range of 1,000 miles on the same amount of
> electricity and that does not include the energy cost of compression
> and transportation of hydrogen.
> 
> When I crunch the numbers for an ICE at $3/gallon and $0.12/kwhr, The
> cost of electricity goes up to $30 and the amount of gasoline goes to
> 10 gallons.  For a 50 mile/gallon ICE, that's a 500 mile range.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Availability - fair enough, if you want to define it that way. But then, you 
need to be consistent with how you define it.

But I don’t think it’s ridiculous for me not to count them as “available”. 

The fueling stations were all “pilot” and not considered “retail” stations. 
Retail stations required credit card capability, and had other standards to get 
funding, set by the state. That didn’t happen until around the time the Hyundai 
was released.  And I wasn’t allowed to fill my Toyota at any place but these 
retail stations.

You want to define it in your way, fine, know know that the industry and the 
state look at it differently. Despite the marketing PR of the OEMs.

“Modern” batteries - We differ on definition of modern EV versus not. I view 
the not- modern ones to be the ones that were common in the late-1800s to the 
early 1900s.

Besides the chemistry of the battery, how else do they differ?  How would you 
view those BEVs or fuel cells that use completely different chemistries? 

- Comparable cars - I think you misunderstood what I said. I didn’t say the 
FCEVs were leading BEVs. I just said that the vehicles weren’t comparable. Has 
nothing to do with energy storage mechanism. 

No need to be insulting.

As far as my comment on the adoption curves of BEV v. FCEV, again, you 
misunderstand what I said, or even the meaning of the data.

Maybe this chart will help.

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/ab8_report_2020.pdf

Page 21 - Figure 8 - Analysis of Historical FCEV and BEV Early-Market 
Deployment Rates

Number of stations - where did you find the incorrect numbers at DOE?

If you look at the above document, 31 stations in 2017, 39 in 2018, 44 in 2019, 
58 in 2020 (given date of document, this would have to be projected), and 
projected 2021 of 62.

These numbers have changed somewhat, and there are other sources that will have 
updates.

Of course, this has nothing to do with what is “better”, only what might work 
for one person over another, which is more location specific in the short term.

But five new stations since 2017? You must have misread the data.

In comparing infrastructure numbers, what would be interesting is a comparison 
on an apples to apples basis. What’s the fueling/recharging capacity that is 
equivalent? I know it’s been done someplace.

One thing you must also recognize is that subsidies for the two technologies 
have been very uneven (I think something like a 5:1 or more ratio). Again, not 
a factor in “which one is better”.

A further interesting comparison is the pathway to self-sufficiency for 
infrastructure. I know the fuel cell industry has done it, but don’t know if 
there is a similar path on the BEV side. That COULD impact a consumer’s view.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 9:06 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Well, a history lesson for you….technically, yes, Honda did start producing 
>> an FCX Clarity in 2008
>> in Japan, and first available there. However, this was essentially a run of 
>> demo vehicles with a
>> very limited number of people that were given them to try. Some key 
>> influencers got them, like
>> several well-known actresses. I tried, but was unable to get one. 
> 
> Whether or not 'you' could get one doesn't hange the fact that they were 
> available to some people, so OBVIOUSLY their development had started.
> 
>> On the BEV side, you’re forgetting the RAV4-EV in 1997, I think, and the EV1 
>> about that time, too,
>> and Honda also had one. 
> 
> I said "Moden EVs", those EVs did not use LiIon batteries.  The rest of their 
> EV drive train is the same as used by modern BEVs  AS WELL AS  FCEVs,  so as 
> far as 'development' goes they are irrelevant since their development is 
> share by both BEVs and FCEVs
> 
> If we want to make rediculous comparisons on development, well hydrogen Fuel 
> Cells have been under continuous development for almost 180 years, whereas 
> LiIon batteries have only been around for ~36 years
> 
>> 
>> Of the EVs you mentioned, really only the Tesla was comparable. I tried 
>> unsuccessfully to get a FIT
>> EV, and that was a great car, but not car able to the FCEVs. And yes, the 
>> EVs outsold the FCEVs in
>> 2012, in part because you could not buy a FCEV! 
> 
> So what you're saying is, when it comes to 'comparable' cars, FCEVs have been 
> leading EVs? 
> Why is it then that while there have been over a million BEVs sold, there 
> have been less than 7,000 FCEVs sold?
> Be honest, what do you think this says about the future of FCEV vs BEVs?  In 
> the real world, not some imaginary daydream of yours.
> 
>> In fact, it you look at sales numbers in California, they were outsold every 
>> year. However, it you
>> compare the adoption curve for the EV with the FCEV, the curve is the same 
>> for the two, just later
>> by seven years. I consider that remarkable given the limits in 
>> infrastructure and other challenges.
> 
> That's 

Re: [EVDL] Hydrogen Isn't Green, After All (Mark Abramowitz)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

The difference in weight is less than 10 pounds. If what you say is true, is 
that even measurable? Count me skeptical. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 6:01 AM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 8/24/21 2:56 AM, Martin WINLOW via EV wrote:
>> Mark: "In pondering what attraction a FCEV might have over a BEV, I hit upon 
>> an
 extremely minor one.  BEVs do not shed mass as they are driven, while
 FCEVs do.  So, FCEVs should see a very slight rise in efficiency as they
 expend their fuel while BEVs do not.  I am NOT claiming that it should
 be a consideration when making buying decisions.  But, since we are
 grasping for straws, it is SOMETHING.”
>> This is only true for ICE vehicles in stop/go (ie urban) driving where you 
>> have to accelerate the mass of the vehicle up to speed and then lose all 
>> that energy braking to a stop again, repeatedly.  On the open road and 
>> sticking to a relatively constant speed, the main force using using energy 
>> is aerodynamic drag (and tyre/road friction plus that of the mechanicals of 
>> the drivetrain).  In an EV, much of the braking in stop/go energy can be 
>> recovered by regenerative braking, thus the ’shed mass’ argument is severely 
>> undermined.  The same applies to hilly terrain.
> 
> 1) I was comparing FCEVs and BEVs.  No consideration of ICE.
> 
> 2) No consideration of energy flows.  Though I believe both FCEVs and BEVs 
> recover kinetic energy via regen.
> 
> 3) To try to be clearer: A FCEV is lighter after it has depleted it's fuel.  
> It has "shed mass".   A BEV is the same weight charged and discharged.  Near 
> the end of the fuel supply, a FCEV is slightly more efficient than when it 
> has a full supply.  A BEV should have the same efficiency when fully charged 
> and near fully discharged.
> 
> Significant?  No.  We are "grasping at straws" for reasons a FCEV might be 
> better than a BEV.
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

rgo volume, similar 
> range and similar weight.  
> The Tesla weighs 120 lbs more (~3% heavier), 7 miles less EPA range (2%), 5% 
> less passenger volume (the tesla has more head room front and back and more 
> front leg room, but less rear legroom), and the tesla has 5% more cargo 
> volume.
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> August 23, 2021 5:52 PM, "Mark Abramowitz via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> A few responses:
>> 
>> FCEVs are certainly earlier stage than EVs. Costs are coming down quickly. 
>> But to the consumer,
>> FCEVs aren’t necessary more expensive. For the cost of a Tesla S, the only 
>> one out when I bought my
>> first FCEV, I could buy at least two FCEVs, taking into account factory and 
>> other incentives.
>> 
>> Currently, are they more expensive? I don’t know. Taking into account 
>> infrastructure, particularly
>> at scale, FCEVs are cheaper. To a consumer, only if they need to put in 
>> charging or fueling
>> infrastructure.
>> 
>> Cost to operate - you give no costs, only efficiency numbers. fCEV owners 
>> pay no nothing for fuel
>> for the first three years. If they lease, nothing. We own one, and lease 
>> one. If you own, after the
>> first three years, it’s VERY expensive, though costs are coming down. 
>> Maintenance is part of cost
>> to own. Some manufacturers include it, some don’t. 
>> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Sums it up nicely with incorrect information?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 5:02 PM, Alan Arrison via EV  wrote:
> 
> Enough with the hydrogen, Peter sums it up nicely.
> 
>> On 8/23/2021 7:27 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV wrote:
>> I thought it was obvious I was comparing BEV vs FCEV.  Apparently not.
>> 
>>> Higher cost to build? Well, yeah. But don’t BEVs cost more to build,
>> An FCEV is an EV with a fuel cell, so most of the extra BEV costs are still 
>> there (still needs an electric motor/controller/batteries/etc)
>> You say a little by using a smaller battery pack but then spend a LOT more 
>> of the fuel cell, tank(s), etc.
>> 
>>> Higher cost to operate. For the consumer? Really?
>> Compared to an BEV?  Yes, absolutely, much higher.  It gets even worse if 
>> you use green H2 since it requires about 3-4x as much electricity per mile 
>> to make the H2 vs charging an EV.
>> 
>>> Lower efficiency. Lower efficiency of what, and to whom?
>> Miles per kWh.  To EVERYONE.
>> Modern LiIon batteries are about 90% efficient at storing energy, chargers 
>> are also around 90%, equaling roughly 80% efficient at stroing electricity 
>> (and that can be improved)
>> Modern electrolyzers are around 80-85% efficient and fuel cells are around 
>> 60%, which means a combined efficiency of ~50%, and that does NOT count any 
>> energy used to compress the H2, which front what I've read brings the total 
>> storage efficiency down to around 25-30%...at best.  You'll also have 
>> additional losses charging/discharging the batteries on the FCEV.
>> 
>>> No existing infrastructure. Again, this all depends. If you have access to 
>>> a station and 5 minutes
>>> to fill every 300 miles or so, that’s plenty .
>> Currently there are less than 40 public H2 stations around LA.  There are 
>> zero H2 stations anywhere else in the USA.
>> Currently, in the USA, there are over 1,000 public charging stations for 
>> every public H2 station.  This number is increasing because while they are 
>> constantly installing new EV charging stations, they are shutting down H2 
>> stations.
>> For all intents and purposes, there is NO H2 fueling infrastructure in the 
>> USA, while Public EV charging stations are becoming common acrost most of 
>> the USA.  Extremely common on the coasts.
>> 
>> As stated above, if you are cracking water for you FCEV, then it takes 3-4x 
>> as much electricity per mile to charge at home (compared to a BEV)
>> 
>> The weight of modern FCEV is roughly the same as the weight of comparable 
>> BEVs, so that's not an advantage to either.
>> 
>> They have EVs available today that can recharge almost as fast as refueling 
>> a FCEV, and you can hook up the charge cord yourself, from what I've read 
>> every H2 fueling station requires a trained individual to connect the hose.  
>> Waiting for him/her to show up could elliminate the remaining time advantage.
>> 
>> Consumers won't purchase FCEV unless they perceive and advantage TO THEM.
>> Let me put it simply, what advantages do YOU see to ANYONE other than the 
>> folks that make H2?
>> How do you see these advantages making FCEV economically viable?
>> Viable enough to justify creating a nation wide H2 fueling infracstructure 
>> from scratch?
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Yep. My money is on the bully factor.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 4:55 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> Yes, it is enteresting that nobody (including you) has posted a single 
> advantage that FCEVs currently have over BEVs.
> 
> Rather telling wouldn't you say?
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> August 19, 2021 11:22 AM, "Mark Abramowitz via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> I guess no one sees *any* advantages? I wonder why? Is everyone using the 
>> same 20 year old
>> information that some are using? Believing some of the myths? Are people 
>> afraid that if they list
>> something they will be attacked or bullied by a few who do that here?
>> 
>> It’s very odd that absolutely no one answered your question about advantages.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
>>> 
>>> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
>>> operate, lower efficiency, no
>>> existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the big advantage that would make 
>>> them worth while?
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You may disagree, but they did give some reasons why someone might choose one 
over another.

To a question “Is an FCEV or a BEV the better choice for a consumer?” The 
answer is “it depends.”

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 4:53 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> Drivel mostly.  
> 
> She compares energy density, but completely ignores the weight of H2 tanks, 
> fuel cells, batteries, etc. on the FCEV. Once you add those in the 
> differences are negligible.
> 
> She lists the speed advantage of refueling, but glosses over the fact that if 
> you not close to one of the few stations, you'll either have to spend a lot 
> of time driving out of your way, or (for someone like me) the time to refuel 
> with H2 is currently infinite.
> Even if I spent the thousands for an H2 hydrolzer and compression system, and 
> additional thousands to double the size of my PV array to power it, I could 
> only drive it locally because the nearest H2 fueling station is over 600 
> miles from my house.
> 
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> August 22, 2021 2:27 PM, "Mark Abramowitz via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> You may find this interesting, in answer to your question.
>> 
>> https://youtu.be/dWAO3vUn7nw
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
>>> 
>>> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
>>> operate, lower efficiency, no
>>> existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the big advantage that would make 
>>> them worth while?
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210822/ac74e089/attachment.html>
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

A few responses:

FCEVs are certainly earlier stage than EVs. Costs are coming down quickly. But 
to the consumer, FCEVs aren’t necessary more expensive. For the cost of a Tesla 
S, the only one out when I bought my first FCEV, I could buy at least two 
FCEVs, taking into account factory and other incentives.

Currently, are they more expensive?  I don’t know. Taking into account 
infrastructure, particularly at scale, FCEVs are cheaper. To a consumer, only 
if they need to put in charging or fueling infrastructure.

Cost to operate - you give no costs, only efficiency numbers. fCEV owners pay 
no nothing for fuel for the first three years. If they lease, nothing. We own 
one, and lease one. If you own, after the first three years, it’s VERY 
expensive, though costs are coming down. Maintenance is part of cost to own. 
Some manufacturers include it, some don’t. 

I don’t know operating costs of an EV, so can’t compare. One company charges 
31¢/kWh IIRC.

Efficiency - if your question is “to the consumer” it’s not as simple as miles 
per kWh. Do consumers even know that? What about time efficiency? Isn’t my time 
spent charging worth something? For some, sure they charge at home and it works 
for them. For others that’s not real world. BTW, efficiencies on both fuel cell 
and electrolyzers are increasing quickly. And then, you need to ask “under what 
conditions?”. What’s the efficiency at 0 degrees F?  110 degrees F?

Infrastructure- Yes, currently infrastructure for H2 needs to be better. For a 
consumer, if there’s convenient fueling for you, there’s no problem. If not, 
it’s not for you. Same as the problem was for BEVs as few years ago.

But stations are *not* being closed.  If fact, the rollout of stations is 
accelerating, in California and internationally. 

Weight - your claim that they are the same was interesting, so I looked up the 
weight of the Honda Clarity Fuel cell and the Honda Clarity BEV. They *are* the 
same weight, but the BEV has an EPA range of 48 miles while the FCEV has a 
range of 366 or so. Of course that changes a LOT for the BEV (and not in a good 
way) when you have extremes of temperature.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 4:27 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> I thought it was obvious I was comparing BEV vs FCEV.  Apparently not.
> 
>> Higher cost to build? Well, yeah. But don’t BEVs cost more to build, 
> An FCEV is an EV with a fuel cell, so most of the extra BEV costs are still 
> there (still needs an electric motor/controller/batteries/etc)
> You say a little by using a smaller battery pack but then spend a LOT more of 
> the fuel cell, tank(s), etc.
> 
>> Higher cost to operate. For the consumer? Really? 
> Compared to an BEV?  Yes, absolutely, much higher.  It gets even worse if you 
> use green H2 since it requires about 3-4x as much electricity per mile to 
> make the H2 vs charging an EV.
> 
>> Lower efficiency. Lower efficiency of what, and to whom? 
> Miles per kWh.  To EVERYONE.
> Modern LiIon batteries are about 90% efficient at storing energy, chargers 
> are also around 90%, equaling roughly 80% efficient at stroing electricity 
> (and that can be improved)
> Modern electrolyzers are around 80-85% efficient and fuel cells are around 
> 60%, which means a combined efficiency of ~50%, and that does NOT count any 
> energy used to compress the H2, which front what I've read brings the total 
> storage efficiency down to around 25-30%...at best.  You'll also have 
> additional losses charging/discharging the batteries on the FCEV.
> 
>> 
>> No existing infrastructure. Again, this all depends. If you have access to a 
>> station and 5 minutes
>> to fill every 300 miles or so, that’s plenty .
> Currently there are less than 40 public H2 stations around LA.  There are 
> zero H2 stations anywhere else in the USA.  
> Currently, in the USA, there are over 1,000 public charging stations for 
> every public H2 station.  This number is increasing because while they are 
> constantly installing new EV charging stations, they are shutting down H2 
> stations.
> For all intents and purposes, there is NO H2 fueling infrastructure in the 
> USA, while Public EV charging stations are becoming common acrost most of the 
> USA.  Extremely common on the coasts.
> 
> As stated above, if you are cracking water for you FCEV, then it takes 3-4x 
> as much electricity per mile to charge at home (compared to a BEV)
> 
> The weight of modern FCEV is roughly the same as the weight of comparable 
> BEVs, so that's not an advantage to either.  
> 
> They have EVs available today that can recharge almost as fast as refueling a 
> FCEV, and you can hook up the charge cord yourself, from what I've read every 
> H2 fueling station requires a trained individual to connect the hose.  
> Waiting for him/her to show up could elliminate the remaining time advantage.
> 
> Consumers won't purchase FCEV unless they perceive and advantage TO THEM.  
> Let 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn’t green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Perhaps not for you, but I’m on my second, my wife has one, and so does my son.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 3:03 PM, nathan christiansn via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> You may find this interesting, in answer to your question.
> 
> https://youtu.be/dWAO3vUn7nw
> 
> - Mark
> 
> I hope everyone heard when she said “thanks to Toyota for sponsoring this
> entire series”
> 
> Toyota has historically been anti BEV and pro FCEV. Like David said, she
> brought up the old lie that if everyone switches to BEVs, the electric grid
> would go down. As BEVs slowly gain market share, the grid will adapt.
> 
> Like I said before, Hydrogen never had and never will have a future in the
> cars that you and I drive.
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Willie,

I actually didn’t see the “EVDL Administrator” questions. I don’t see his stuff 
- they go automatically in the bit bucket.

As far as the main question you and Peter posted, I’ve posted that I prefer to 
sit back and see what others come up with.

I’m pretty sure I’ve already posted my thought on it in the past. I may do so 
again, but I’ve waiting to see what others could come up with.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 5:52 AM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 8/23/21 6:09 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV wrote:
>> Mark, I'd still like to read YOUR responses to the questions posted here,
>> especially to my own questions.
> Ditto.  Though I have posted no specific questions.  But the primary question 
> seems to remain unanswered: "Why might a car buyer select a FCEV over a BEV?"
>>  
>> That said, thanks for posting that video clip.
>> 
>> 
>> But that's just technical griping.  To get to the info, the presenter made a
>> point that I hadn't thought much about - increasing range on an FCEV is less
>> likely to add significant weight than it would on a BEV.
>> 
>> She seems to think that that matters more for trucks than cars.  I'd say
>> that the opposite is true.  When you consider battery weight as a percentage
>> of a  truck's payload,  more might not be that big a deal.
> Thanks for the interpretation of the video.  I am generally not willing to 
> expend expensive bandwidth to view videos.
>> 
>> She points out that FCEVs fuel faster.  She says 5 minutes for FCEVs;
>> elsewhere I've read 8 minutes.  However, as superchargers hit 300kW, the
>> difference is narrowing.
> 
> An anecdote:  I recently charged at one of the new 250kw SuperChargers and 
> was impressed.  Though I did not measure total charge time, I did notice that 
> it started at about 240kw and by the time it had tapered to 200kw, I had 
> added more than 100 miles of range.  I needed more than that 100 miles so 
> spent a total of approximately 20 minutes charging.  In our area, 150kw 
> chargers are far more common where 30 minute charge times are typical. 150kw 
> chargers typically peak at 140-145kw and quickly taper.  I do not see real 
> significance in the difference.  When on the road, I spend almost no time 
> waiting for a charge.  Getting coffee and taking head breaks uses most of the 
> charge time.  We've mentioned it MANY times but most, by far, charging takes 
> NO time since it is done at night at homes.
> 
> Tesla is behind in charging times since all Tesla batteries are ~400 volts 
> and can not take advantage of 800 volt chargers. Though I have never actually 
> seen a 800 volt charger.  Quick charging is mostly a concern of those who do 
> no yet have Teslas.
> 
> In pondering what attraction a FCEV might have over a BEV, I hit upon an 
> extremely minor one.  BEVs do not shed mass as they are driven, while FCEVs 
> do.  So, FCEVs should see a very slight rise in efficiency as they expend 
> their fuel while BEVs do not.  I am NOT claiming that it should be a 
> consideration when making buying decisions.  But, since we are grasping for 
> straws, it is SOMETHING.
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I wouldn’t expect that Toyota had that kind of editorial influence, nor would 
exercise it if they could.

The statement was clearly not correct, and maybe the person just misspoke. But 
wind day and night? Consistently? The data I’ve seen over the years indicates 
that most wind is at at night. 

As far as “pollution” made by production, there is some, but that is not what 
folks focus on or address. It’s the greenhouse gases, not the pollution. 

As far as source of hydrogen for fuel cells, people make a wrong jump in logic 
on this. Some will say that 90% of the hydrogen made is from fossil natural 
gas, and therefore that 90% of the hydrogen used in fuel cells in 
transportation is from fossil natural gas.

*That’s* incorrect.

In California, if you were pumping hydrogen into your fuel car recently, the 
hydrogen you were pumping was 90%+ renewable, and not fossil.

And I can say with certainty that Toyota was one of the emphatic voices that we 
need to move toward renewables. Why? Because their customers that would be 
buying their fuel cell cars demanded it.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 23, 2021, at 8:19 AM, Bobby Keeland via EV  wrote:
> 
> I found it very interesting when one person who was being interviewed
> talked about an advance of FCEVs over BEVs was when refueling at night when
> the sun is not and “when the wind is not blowing.” I’ve lived in 10
> different states and visited all 50 states. It is clear that wind blows
> both during the night and day. I guess that when an investigation/report is
> sponsored by Toyota the info presented favors Toyota as much as possible.
> The lady also failed to truly list the pollution caused by the predominate
> source of hydrogen for the fuel cell. From what I have read many times over
> the past few years the majority of hydrogen for fuel cells comes from
> natural gas. That natural gas is probably extracted from the earth via
> fracking which is most certainly not earth or people friendly.
> 
> Bobby Keeland
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 8:08 AM Willie via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 8/23/21 6:09 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV wrote:
>>> Mark, I'd still like to read YOUR responses to the questions posted here,
>>> especially to my own questions.
>> Ditto.  Though I have posted no specific questions.  But the primary
>> question seems to remain unanswered: "Why might a car buyer select a
>> FCEV over a BEV?"
>>> 
>>> 
>>> That said, thanks for posting that video clip.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But that's just technical griping.  To get to the info, the presenter
>> made a
>>> point that I hadn't thought much about - increasing range on an FCEV is
>> less
>>> likely to add significant weight than it would on a BEV.
>>> 
>>> She seems to think that that matters more for trucks than cars.  I'd say
>>> that the opposite is true.  When you consider battery weight as a
>> percentage
>>> of a  truck's payload,  more might not be that big a deal.
>> Thanks for the interpretation of the video.  I am generally not willing
>> to expend expensive bandwidth to view videos.
>>> 
>>> She points out that FCEVs fuel faster.  She says 5 minutes for FCEVs;
>>> elsewhere I've read 8 minutes.  However, as superchargers hit 300kW, the
>>> difference is narrowing.
>> 
>> An anecdote:  I recently charged at one of the new 250kw SuperChargers
>> and was impressed.  Though I did not measure total charge time, I did
>> notice that it started at about 240kw and by the time it had tapered to
>> 200kw, I had added more than 100 miles of range.  I needed more than
>> that 100 miles so spent a total of approximately 20 minutes charging.
>> In our area, 150kw chargers are far more common where 30 minute charge
>> times are typical. 150kw chargers typically peak at 140-145kw and
>> quickly taper.  I do not see real significance in the difference.  When
>> on the road, I spend almost no time waiting for a charge.  Getting
>> coffee and taking head breaks uses most of the charge time.  We've
>> mentioned it MANY times but most, by far, charging takes NO time since
>> it is done at night at homes.
>> 
>> Tesla is behind in charging times since all Tesla batteries are ~400
>> volts and can not take advantage of 800 volt chargers. Though I have
>> never actually seen a 800 volt charger.  Quick charging is mostly a
>> concern of those who do no yet have Teslas.
>> 
>> In pondering what attraction a FCEV might have over a BEV, I hit upon an
>> extremely minor one.  BEVs do not shed mass as they are driven, while
>> FCEVs do.  So, FCEVs should see a very slight rise in efficiency as they
>> expend their fuel while BEVs do not.  I am NOT claiming that it should
>> be a consideration when making buying decisions.  But, since we are
>> grasping for straws, it is SOMETHING.
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Things like this are always in a fluff style, but for a group where *no one* 
could identify *any* advantages of a fuel cell electric vehicle, it might be at 
the right level. However, there *was* some meaty stuff in there, presented for 
non-geeks to understand.

As far as not answering your questions, actually it was *you* that didn’t 
answer questions I asked.

I’m not sure what questions you asked that weren’t answered, but perhaps they 
had already been answered. But I have to say, it’s tough to take seriously a 
poster who cites 20+ year old performance data about a nascent industry, and 
presents that information as currently factual. Or who posts “facts” that would 
cause fear, uncertainty or doubt (FUD). Imagine if I had posted on a hydrogen 
list that a pregnant woman shouldn’t drive a Tesla because the electronics 
could cause miscarriages. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 22, 2021, at 6:03 PM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> I listened but it was a lot of fluff and no opportunity to ask questions.
> I asked you questions and you didn’t reply.
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 7:40 PM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> You may find this interesting, in answer to your question.
>> 
>> https://youtu.be/dWAO3vUn7nw
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
>>> 
>>> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to
>> operate, lower efficiency, no existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the
>> big advantage that would make them worth while?
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> 
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210822/ac74e089/attachment.html
>>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210822/b1169caa/attachment.html>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You may find this interesting, in answer to your question.

https://youtu.be/dWAO3vUn7nw

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
> 
> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
> operate, lower efficiency, no existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the 
> big advantage that would make them worth while?
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] California authorizes emergency diesel backup grid electrical generation

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Not rushed through.

Appalling? Yes. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 20, 2021, at 9:03 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
>  
> https://www.utilitydive.com/news/california-authorizes-summer-reliability-fixes-despite-concerns-over-back-u/597381/
>  This is being rushed through. Lawrence Rhodes... Lawsuit?
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I guess no one sees *any* advantages? I wonder why? Is everyone using the same 
20 year old information that some are using? Believing some of the myths? Are 
people afraid that if they list something they will be attacked or bullied by a 
few who do that here?

It’s very odd that absolutely no one answered your question about advantages.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
> 
> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
> operate, lower efficiency, no existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the 
> big advantage that would make them worth while?
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I understood that.

But advantage over a BEV to *whom*? A consumer, a manufacturer, and a 
policymaker all will view an FCEV compared to a BEV very differently.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 8:17 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> I guess you missed the first sentence.. .  compared to a BEV?
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> 
> August 17, 2021 6:50 PM, "Mark Abramowitz via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> Your question is a good one, though unclear.
>> 
>> *Which* people? Are you asking about the advantage to a consumer? A 
>> manufacturer? A policy maker?
>> 
>> Your “tons of disadvantages” can also be applied to BEVs or. At simply be 
>> not accurate.
>> 
>> Higher cost to build? Well, yeah. But don’t BEVs cost more to build, too, 
>> than an ICE? Go back a
>> few years ago, when battery costs were so much higher, even more so. The 
>> look at the cost
>> differentials when the first modern ones came out, and it was early in the 
>> development cycle.
>> Remember the first Priuses? It took years for the first profit, and then 
>> became California’s
>> top-selling car. Long term is the cost higher? And if it is, what’s the 
>> benefit (and advantages)?
>> 
>> Higher cost to operate. For the consumer? Really? No fuel cost (for three 
>> years, at least). I
>> understand that maybe it’s more complicated than that, but just don’t put a 
>> zero on the cost of
>> charging. Maintenance cost? Maybe higher, I don’t know.
>> 
>> Lower efficiency. Lower efficiency of what, and to whom? 
>> 
>> No existing infrastructure. Again, this all depends. If you have access to a 
>> station and 5 minutes
>> to fill every 300 miles or so, that’s plenty . The problem is that right 
>> NOW, everyone doesn’t have
>> that. But that’s the same on the BEV side, though depending on the use, 
>> *can* be less of an issue
>> because of home charging. I say “can” because we are needing to subsidize 
>> non-residential charging
>> to the tune of billions, so apparently it’s essential (or we are wasting 
>> money). Perhaps that is
>> the case because, unless most of us here that think that residential 
>> charging could be sufficient
>> for most, the California Energy Commission thinks differently. Their surveys 
>> have caused them to
>> conclude that the biggest barrier for people buying BEVs is “lack of 
>> infrastructure.” On both the
>> BEV and FCEV side that’s just a matter of time getting the infrastructure 
>> in. But guess what? At
>> scale, infrastructure for FCEVs will be cheaper than BEVs, at least 
>> according to a McKinsey study,
>> and I believe the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Hence their “H2 at Scale” 
>> initiative. I’ve seen some work
>> that indicates that even today, it’s cheaper.
>> 
>> I won’t weigh in with my list of advantages of FCEVs, but will enjoy seeing 
>> the lists of others in
>> answer to your question.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
>>> 
>>> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
>>> operate, lower efficiency, no
>>> existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the big advantage that would make 
>>> them worth while?
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You may be a perfect example of someone that a BEV is a better solution.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 3:27 PM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> Hello David,
> 
> One of the advantages to an EV is that it takes me about 20 seconds to
> hook up the charger cord to the recharging port and walk away.  I'm on
> 120v AC 12 amps.  I come back in the morning or whenever and I have
> more range on my pack.  Another 20 seconds of unplugging and I'm ready
> to go.  It's wonderful.  There is no more driving to and standing in
> line to fill an ICE tank with gasoline (or hydrogen).
> 
> Range anxiety has disappeared like a gaseous discharge in the wind.
> 
> If a hydrogen station were available nearby and an EV and a HFCEV were
> available of equal value, would I jump ship to buy a HFCEV?  To do so,
> the hydrogen fuel would have to be a lot cheaper.
> 
> I could see where the trucking industry might be onboard at some
> point.  The technology might drift down to the ICE level the same way
> diesel drifted from trucks to ICE vehicles during the embargoes.  But
> first the trucks have to adapt to hydrogen.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not seeing a hydrogen future anytime soon.
> 
> A hydrogen economy seven years away???  It might be if EV development
> were to be at a stand still.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 3:34 AM EVDL Administrator via EV
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 16 Aug 2021 at 14:03, Peter Eckhoff via EV wrote:
>>> 
>>> The article used Bar instead of PSI.  Engineers and Scientists may
>>> know that one Bar is 14.7 pounds per square inch at sea level but the 
>>> general
>>> public understands PSI a whole lot better.
>> 
>> I guess it depends on who the intended audience is.   I'm not familar with
>> the article, but I'm pretty sure that PSI is really only spoken regularly in
>> the US.  It might also have some use in Canada and the UK.  The sensible

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Your question is a good one, though unclear.

*Which* people?  Are you asking about the advantage to a consumer? A 
manufacturer? A policy maker?

Your “tons of disadvantages” can also be applied to BEVs or. At simply be not 
accurate.

Higher cost to build? Well, yeah. But don’t BEVs cost more to build, too, than 
an ICE? Go back a few years ago, when battery costs were so much higher, even 
more so. The look at the cost differentials when the first modern ones came 
out, and it was early in the development cycle. Remember the first Priuses? It 
took years for the first profit, and then became California’s top-selling car. 
Long term is the cost higher? And if it is, what’s the benefit (and advantages)?

Higher cost to operate. For the consumer? Really? No fuel cost (for three 
years, at least). I understand that maybe it’s more complicated than that, but 
just don’t put a zero on the cost of charging. Maintenance cost? Maybe higher, 
I don’t know.

Lower efficiency. Lower efficiency of what, and to whom? 

No existing infrastructure. Again,  this all depends. If you have access to a 
station and 5 minutes to fill every 300 miles or so, that’s plenty . The 
problem is that right NOW, everyone doesn’t have that.  But that’s the same on 
the BEV side, though depending on the use, *can* be less of an issue because of 
home charging. I say “can” because we are needing to subsidize non-residential 
charging to the tune of billions, so apparently it’s essential (or we are 
wasting money). Perhaps that is the case because, unless most of us here that 
think that residential charging could be sufficient for most, the California 
Energy Commission thinks differently. Their surveys have caused them to 
conclude that the biggest barrier for people buying BEVs is “lack of 
infrastructure.” On both the BEV and FCEV side that’s just a matter of time 
getting the infrastructure in. But guess what?  At scale, infrastructure for 
FCEVs will be cheaper than BEVs, at least according to a McKinsey study, and I 
believe the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Hence their “H2 at Scale” initiative. I’ve 
seen some work that indicates that even today, it’s cheaper.

I won’t weigh in with my list of advantages of FCEVs, but will enjoy seeing the 
lists of others in answer to your question.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> What, exactly, do people see as the advantage(s) of a FCEV over a BEV?
> 
> There are tons of disadvantages, higher cost to build, higher cost to 
> operate, lower efficiency, no existing infrastructure, etc.; so what is the 
> big advantage that would make them worth while?
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Electric riding mowers

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

…and that’s the cheap one.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 16, 2021, at 1:23 PM, paul dove  wrote:
> 
> 
> I have one too but their riders are very high starting at $5,000. 
> 
> On Sunday, August 15, 2021, 3:37:06 PM CDT, Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> My current (non-riding) mower is made by Greenworks. I love it. They have 
> moved to lithium ion battery technology. They also have at least one 
> commercial riding mower. You might want to have a look.
> 
> I like this company because the CEO is not only a nice guy, but is a 
> motivated guy who wants all yard equipment to go electric. He has started 
> from scratch and works his tail off. I give him credit for a movement that is 
> gaining steam for commercial lawn companies to use electric yard equipment, 
> and for cities to spec them in contracting out services.
> 
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
> > On Aug 15, 2021, at 10:06 AM, fred via EV  wrote:
> > 
> >  I too have been disappointed in the lack of lithium-chemistry battery 
> > electric mowers. Many moons ago, we purchased an Ariens Amp electric rider. 
> > Twenty tiny VRSLA batteries (4s5p) stuffed under the seat. The mower has 
> > been severely criticized in review from past times, although for wrong 
> > reasons, in my opinion.
> > In the Florida heat, the pack managed to last three years. The replacement 
> > US$600.00 pack lasted about a year and a half. Thanks to a list member, my 
> > mower now sports a half-module from a Volt.
> > I'm aware from my lead-acid Xebra days that fifty percent DoD is safest, so 
> > the mower got equipped with a CycleAnalyst, high current version. That 
> > meant I could baby the lead-acid pack, but it still could not tolerate the 
> > heat of the day or the heat of the storage. It turned into a 
> > three-charge-cycles-to-mow-a-quarter-acre mower.
> > Having the Volt half-module means I can get two runs, possibly three from a 
> > single charge, but I am babying the pack even now by not max-charging it 
> > and bringing the battery inside after each use and also no charging it 
> > until the day before it is needed. I had to purchase a full module for 
> > US$600 but that means I have twice the capacity (but can't fit them both 
> > inside) so I alternate the batteries. To further ensure long happy life, I 
> > purchased an expensive charger that does individual cell balancing and the 
> > Volt battery came with a balancing cable! I expect the modules will outlast 
> > me.
> > Any EV owner knows how the quiet is the best part of the vehicle (opinion, 
> > of course), but the Amp really screwed that up. They used what I suspect is 
> > the technology they knew and put a hydrostatic transmission in this thing. 
> > That means the traction motor runs constantly to keep the system 
> > pressurized, a complete waste of energy. Hydraulics are not known to be 
> > particularly efficient in power transfer. The two systems alone amount for 
> > eighty percent of the noise. One neighbor told me that he was surprised I 
> > had a fuel powered mower, after hearing me start it.
> > If I had to replace the Amp, I'd look for a lithium version I could afford, 
> > or consider immediately to replace the lead pack.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- next part --
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: 
> > <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210815/4b0382cb/attachment.html>
> > ___
> > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> > No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> > LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> > 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210816/469760d2/attachment.html>
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You just read what I wrote very selectively. I’m not an advocate here for 
anybody. I mentioned Plug’s green hydrogen, so I disclosed it. I have stock in 
Tesla - so what? What have you disclosed? What other interests do you have?

As far as how many cars have it, you nicely make the arguments I battled for 
years about BEVs, except that they had been around for 100 years. Never gonna 
make it…won’t work… yadda, yadda, yadda.

Actually if you want to look at the market, and ignoring the RAV4-EV, EV1, and 
whatever Honda released years ago, despite infrastructure challenges, the 
uptake of fuel cells EVs in the market matches that of BEVs, except seven years 
later.  

You won’t have that luck in Washington for awhile, and will likely see heavy 
duty applications first.

BTW, when responding to a Digest post, please fix the subject out of courtesy 
to others.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 11:24 PM, Tim Economu via EV  wrote:
> Not sure why hydrogen is being seriously discussed. Plug Power has one 
> advocate on the list! Fool cells have been around now (including Plug's) for 
> many decades, and how many cars have the technology? Better yet, how many 
> refueling stations do we have in Washington State? Zero? Yep still zero after 
> all these years. Does fossil free H have a future? Sure, but not in cars. 
> Maybe in heavy equipment and air travel. But not in cars. Give me a break!
> 
> Tim
> 
> On 8/15/2021 9:20 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
>>  2030 as a goal for 100% decarbonized hydrogen.
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn’t green after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I really don’t know anything about the ability of the tanks to age and develop 
cracks over time.

Can you expand on that?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 4:33 PM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> I was thinking of 700 bar tanks with 3 per car and several hundred
> million cars (not just Camrys) being made with these tanks.  As with
> you, I would not want to be in or near such a car when it let go.  The
> longer they are in a car, they will likely age and develop cracks.
> 
> There was a reference to a company called Plastic Kinetics that has
> developed a way of storing hydrogen on thin film
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEm4mEizns
> 
> If this is true and viable, it "solves" one of the major road blocks
> to adoption; the storage of hydrogen at reasonable pressures.
> 
> The other major problems have been the use of platinum in creating PEM
> fuel cells and the production of hydrogen.  There has been a lot of
> hype on the later.
> 
> Until I can go into a dealer, buy a HFCEV, and drive to some remote
> part of the country and not worry about a hydrogen supply, I'm
> sticking with a BEV.
> 
> At least with a Tesla, there were a number of occasions where the
> Tesla where you can be in the middle of nowhere and recharge.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:18 PM nathan christiansn via EV
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Manufacturing defects in a Camry? I?m not sure what you are talking about.
>> No Camrys involved. Tanks get tested. If you are trying to imply that they
>> are dangerous, well so is everything. Risks get managed. Some get managed
>> better than others. Batteries have their own risks, too, as does any other
>> energy storage mechanism.
>> 
>> Umm… here’s the problem. Having a 5,000 PSI hydrogen storage tank sitting
>> under your hood is like having 50 pounds of tannerite sitting in your trunk
>> at all times. If you get into an accident and that hydrogen tank is
>> damaged, the results will be catastrophic to say the least. Yes, lithiums
>> have their risks too, but they are still a lot safer than a 5000 PSI vessel
>> full of flammable gas.
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Thin Film Storage of H2 at Lower pressures PLASMA KENETICS

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Well, what he is proposing in that video is just a means of storage, and 
appears to have nothing to do with how it is produced or what you produce it 
with.

As far as production of hydrogen is concerned, “dirty methane” is used less and 
less. It’s been several years already that the industry set 2030 as a goal for 
100% decarbonized hydrogen. In California, we are already almost there.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 1:59 PM, Steven Lough via EV  wrote:
> 
> This may have been talked about here already,  but it is the first for me 
> where I am not discarding the whole notion of Fool Cells, as I am so used to 
> calling them.
> 
> Seems to still be rather complicated.  But it is using electralizers in stead 
> of dirty methane.
> 
> ( https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=brEm4mEizns=963s )
> 
> Will be interested in all comments.
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Compression is not “an issue”. It’s just something that’s a factor. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 1:13 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> The compression issue is another reason why excess wind and solar energy 
> should be converted to hydrogen for grid backup rather than vehicles. It 
> doesn't need to be compressed. This technique has been used for natural gas 
> for decades in some places, where there's a giant inflatable tank that's more 
> or less at atmospheric pressure.
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Robert Bruninga via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "Robert Bruninga" 
> Sent: 15-Aug-21 13:02:45
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
> 
>> But then there is still the 30% loss in inefficiency in all the heat loss in
>> compressing the hydrogen into tanks. (and hoping it wont explode).
>> Bob
>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 3:39 PM Michael Ross via EV  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> From the WIKI:
>>> "Considering the industrial production of hydrogen, and using current best
>>> processes for water electrolysis (PEM or alkaline electrolysis) which have
>>> an effective electrical efficiency of 70–80%"
>>> I actually thought 70% was as good as it gets, but  they think in another
>>> 10 years it might be in the upper 90%'s.
>>> 
>>> I recall that the combustion of hydrogen was also pretty lossy. SO a lot of
>>> inefficiency coming and going with H. I will try to find where I got that
>>> idea and write back. The discussion was to the effect that combining O2 and
>>> H2 could never be better than some ceiling %.
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 3:20 PM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > Gee, a lot of incorrect stuff to reply to.
>>> >

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

MUCH better chance of a battery catching fire than a hydrogen tank exploding. 
In fact, the latter is unlikely to happen. The former, it happens all the time.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 1:03 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV  wrote:
> 
> But then there is still the 30% loss in inefficiency in all the heat loss in
> compressing the hydrogen into tanks. (and hoping it wont explode).
> Bob
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 3:39 PM Michael Ross via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> From the WIKI:
>> "Considering the industrial production of hydrogen, and using current best
>> processes for water electrolysis (PEM or alkaline electrolysis) which have
>> an effective electrical efficiency of 70–80%"
>> I actually thought 70% was as good as it gets, but  they think in another
>> 10 years it might be in the upper 90%'s.
>> 
>> I recall that the combustion of hydrogen was also pretty lossy. SO a lot of
>> inefficiency coming and going with H. I will try to find where I got that
>> idea and write back. The discussion was to the effect that combining O2 and
>> H2 could never be better than some ceiling %.
>> 
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 3:20 PM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Gee, a lot of incorrect stuff to reply to.
>>> 
>>> Not incorrect, but you think that PSI is less confusing to use than bar?
>>> Then it’s 10,000 PSI. As far as your description of what it is - frankly, I
>>> hadn’t a clue what you were talking about. Your numbers seem to be
>>> confusing a point.
>>> 
>>> Manufacturing defects in a Camry? I’m not sure what you are talking about.
>>> No Camrys involved. Tanks get tested. If you are trying to imply that they
>>> are dangerous, well so is everything. Risks get managed. Some get managed
>>> better than others. Batteries have their own risks, too, as does any other
>>> energy storage mechanism.
>>> 
>>> Fuel cell lifetime of 2,000 hours? Care to provide a source? It’s just not
>>> true.
>>> 
>>> Electrolysis not very efficient? What do *you* consider “not very
>>> efficient”? What do you consider acceptable efficiency?
>>> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Amen.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 1:02 PM, Michael Ross via EV  wrote:
> 
> I think the future will be a combination of all sorts of means. We
> can't extraoplate any single energy source or means of distribution as THE
> ONE. It won't work that way.
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Hyzon FC trucks (hydrogen isn't green, after all)

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

There are some regulatory drivers here, not just company image or ESG.

Companies will need to buy zero emission trucks.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 11:11 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> This will be interesting to watch. They want a half billion dollars to scale 
> up, which actually sounds kind of small for the kind of manufacturing they 
> are planning. I think Tesla invested a lot more than that to start its 
> Gigafactories and other facilities. Even so, will they be able to generate 
> enough revenue to pay debt service and keep investors happy. And, the payback 
> for customers is questionable. While corporations might be willing to pay 
> more up front for putting on a greener image, it will need to pay off in the 
> long run. Theoretically it seems it should - all the arguments for EVs should 
> more or less apply: little fuel used while idling, far less drive train 
> maintenance, presumably lower fuel costs.
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "paul dove via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "paul dove" ; "EVDL Administrator" 
> Sent: 15-Aug-21 05:43:24
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
> 
>> Hyzon Motors has begun shipping hydrogen fuel cell trucks to customers – 
>> TechCrunch
>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2021/08/11/hyzon-motors-has-begun-shipping-hydrogen-fuel-cell-trucks-to-customers/amp/
>> Interesting startup
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> On Sunday, August 15, 2021, 2:58 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I'm not an expert, just a longtime EV follower, but I think that when it
>> comes to road vehicles, hydrogen had its chance and missed it.
>> 
>> In 2001, the limitation on EVs was, and always had been, the battery.  In
>> 1999, the GM EV1 had had a 26kWh NiMH battery, and the Nissan Altra EV had
>> had a 32 kWh lithium ion battery - more than respectable for the time.  But
>> NiMH was artificially locked out of real world EVs, and both types were
>> hideously expensive.  For all intents and purposes, in 2001 EV batteries
>> were still lead. A typical conversion carried maybe 12kWh of usable
>> capacity.
>> 
>> Who here would have guessed then that 20 years hence we'd have production
>> EVs at all, much less production EVs with batteries in the 50-100kWh
>> capacity range?  Who would have thought that 150kW public charging would
>> start to appear on main highways, potentially charging a 50kWh battery in 20
>> minutes?
>> 
>> In 2001, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and Hyundai all had concept and/or
>> demonstration FCEVs running.  The feeble BEV range of the time opened a
>> window of opportunity for them.
>> 
>> Honda was the first to US market (California lease only) with the FCX
>> Clarity in 2008.  Between 2008 and 2015, they leased all of 48.  (They now
>> have another on offer, but again only in California, for reasons that will
>> become clear in a moment.)
>> 
>> After what they did with getting the Prius to market, you'd think that if
>> anyone could make FCEVs a success, it would be Toyota.
>> 
>> Toyota put the Mirai FCEV on US offer in 2015 (exactly 6 years ago to the
>> day, in fact).  It had a fairly impressive per-fillup range of 312 miles.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, that hydrogen fillup cost about $85.  And since hydrogen was
>> nigh onto unavailable anywhere but in California (even today only 17 other
>> states have *any* H2 stations), that was the only state where you could buy
>> one -  or drive one.
>> 
>> That same year, 2015, you could buy a Tesla Model S 85D with 260+ miles of
>> range and fill it up at any supercharger in any state.  The S cost more than
>> the Mirai did, but the cost of "free" supercharger use for as long as you
>> owned it was still built into the price of the car.
>> 
>> 2016 Sales
>> 
>> Toyota Mirai: 1,034
>> Tesla Model S: 29,421
>> 
>> Now why do you suppose Tesla sold over 28 times as many in 2016?
>> 
>> I have serious reservations about any automaker developing its own fueling
>> infrastructure, but the fact is that Tesla built superchargers by the dozens
>> and hundreds.  How many hydrogen filling stations did Toyota build?
>> 
>> EVs are a HUGE change in vehicle culture.  Public charging for them is a
>> HUGE investment in infrastructure.
>> 
>> The reality of capitalism is that it resists such changes with all its
>> might.  Thus it's almost a miracle that we've seen BEVs become more or less
>> mainstream, at least in Europe.
>> 
>> A change like that doesn't come along often.  TWO of each - BEVs and FCEVs,
>> charging service and hydrogen fuel service - just aren't bloody likely to
>> develop in one generation, let alone in a decade or two.
>> 
>> BEV public charging is growing fast, and its power is too.  BEVs are now
>> practical for many drivers, sometimes as an only vehicle.
>> 
>> Hydrogen fueling is barely 

Re: [EVDL] Electric riding mowers

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

My current (non-riding) mower is made by Greenworks. I love it. They have moved 
to lithium ion battery technology. They also have at least one commercial 
riding mower. You might want to have a look.

I like this company because the CEO is not only a nice guy, but is a motivated 
guy who wants all yard equipment to go electric. He has started from scratch 
and works his tail off. I give him credit for a movement that is gaining steam 
for commercial lawn companies to use electric yard equipment, and for cities to 
spec them in contracting out services.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 10:06 AM, fred via EV  wrote:
> 
>  I too have been disappointed in the lack of lithium-chemistry battery 
> electric mowers. Many moons ago, we purchased an Ariens Amp electric rider. 
> Twenty tiny VRSLA batteries (4s5p) stuffed under the seat. The mower has been 
> severely criticized in review from past times, although for wrong reasons, in 
> my opinion.
> In the Florida heat, the pack managed to last three years. The replacement 
> US$600.00 pack lasted about a year and a half. Thanks to a list member, my 
> mower now sports a half-module from a Volt.
> I'm aware from my lead-acid Xebra days that fifty percent DoD is safest, so 
> the mower got equipped with a CycleAnalyst, high current version. That meant 
> I could baby the lead-acid pack, but it still could not tolerate the heat of 
> the day or the heat of the storage. It turned into a 
> three-charge-cycles-to-mow-a-quarter-acre mower.
> Having the Volt half-module means I can get two runs, possibly three from a 
> single charge, but I am babying the pack even now by not max-charging it and 
> bringing the battery inside after each use and also no charging it until the 
> day before it is needed. I had to purchase a full module for US$600 but that 
> means I have twice the capacity (but can't fit them both inside) so I 
> alternate the batteries. To further ensure long happy life, I purchased an 
> expensive charger that does individual cell balancing and the Volt battery 
> came with a balancing cable! I expect the modules will outlast me.
> Any EV owner knows how the quiet is the best part of the vehicle (opinion, of 
> course), but the Amp really screwed that up. They used what I suspect is the 
> technology they knew and put a hydrostatic transmission in this thing. That 
> means the traction motor runs constantly to keep the system pressurized, a 
> complete waste of energy. Hydraulics are not known to be particularly 
> efficient in power transfer. The two systems alone amount for eighty percent 
> of the noise. One neighbor told me that he was surprised I had a fuel powered 
> mower, after hearing me start it.
> If I had to replace the Amp, I'd look for a lithium version I could afford, 
> or consider immediately to replace the lead pack.
> 
> 
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Most here don’t make disclosures, but I will disclose that Plug Power is a 
client. I don’t speak for them, though, and my comments, as anyways, are my own 
opinion.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 9:21 AM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> Well, I didn’t saw that batteries were inefficient, but they can be.
> 
> As far as hydrogen not being efficient or inefficient to produce from 
> electrolysis, again, not a point I made. But what do you consider efficient?
> 
> Economical? Okay, it wasn’t clear you meant that. At a 3¢/kWh cost of solar, 
> Plug Power has said that they can produce hydrogen from electrolysis at a 
> cost that is competitive with that of hydrogen made from fossil. I think that 
> number is $1.50/kg.  They are building plants right now.  
> 
> They also have said that within a few years they will be cost competitive 
> with diesel.
> 
> The numbers here are irrelevant to the point, though, and I think take away 
> from it. In terms of being economical, it only has to be competitive with 
> whatever else is being used.(if a bear is chasing us both, I don’t need to be 
> faster than the bear, only faster than you).  And the economics can be 
> inclusive of other things, too - storage, space, regulatory requirements, 
> etc.. so don’t get too caught up on specific numbers. And in a nascent 
> technology, those numbers change quickly! 
> 
> So, I gave you numbers, but did they really help?
> 
> 
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:32 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> I am very clear: it is not efficient nor economical to produce hydrogen 
>> from electrolysis and it is more efficient and economic to use and store 
>> electricity in batteries than to convert to hydrogen, compress and transport 
>> it, then convert it back to electricity using a fuel cell.
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>> 
>> -- Original Message --
>> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
>> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>> 
>> Sent: 15-Aug-21 08:29:29
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
>> 
>>> I made several points. You weren’t clear what you didn’t believe.
>>> 
>>> Let me know and I’ll do my best to address it.
>>> 
>>> - Mark
>>> 
>>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  
>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Mark, it's you who is attempting to make a point. I'm waiting for you to 
>>>> substantiate your point. If you can do that without numbers, that's fine.
>>>> 
>>>> Peri
>>>> 
>>>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>>>> 
>>>> -- Original Message --
>>>> From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
>>>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>>>> Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
>>>> Sent: 14-Aug-21 21:19:00
>>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
>>>> 
>>>>> I’m not sure what you want numbers on, but a point can certainly be made 
>>>>> without them, and frequently, numbers can get in the way.
> 
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Well, I didn’t saw that batteries were inefficient, but they can be.

As far as hydrogen not being efficient or inefficient to produce from 
electrolysis, again, not a point I made. But what do you consider efficient?

Economical? Okay, it wasn’t clear you meant that. At a 3¢/kWh cost of solar, 
Plug Power has said that they can produce hydrogen from electrolysis at a cost 
that is competitive with that of hydrogen made from fossil. I think that number 
is $1.50/kg.  They are building plants right now.  

They also have said that within a few years they will be cost competitive with 
diesel.

The numbers here are irrelevant to the point, though, and I think take away 
from it. In terms of being economical, it only has to be competitive with 
whatever else is being used.(if a bear is chasing us both, I don’t need to be 
faster than the bear, only faster than you).  And the economics can be 
inclusive of other things, too - storage, space, regulatory requirements, etc.. 
so don’t get too caught up on specific numbers. And in a nascent technology, 
those numbers change quickly! 

So, I gave you numbers, but did they really help?



- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:32 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> I am very clear: it is not efficient nor economical to produce hydrogen from 
> electrolysis and it is more efficient and economic to use and store 
> electricity in batteries than to convert to hydrogen, compress and transport 
> it, then convert it back to electricity using a fuel cell.
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> 
> Sent: 15-Aug-21 08:29:29
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
> 
>> I made several points. You weren’t clear what you didn’t believe.
>> 
>> Let me know and I’ll do my best to address it.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Mark, it's you who is attempting to make a point. I'm waiting for you to 
>>> substantiate your point. If you can do that without numbers, that's fine.
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>>> 
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
>>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>>> Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
>>> Sent: 14-Aug-21 21:19:00
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
>>> 
>>>> I’m not sure what you want numbers on, but a point can certainly be made 
>>>> without them, and frequently, numbers can get in the way.

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Gee, a lot of incorrect stuff to reply to.

Not incorrect, but you think that PSI is less confusing to use than bar?  Then 
it’s 10,000 PSI. As far as your description of what it is - frankly, I hadn’t a 
clue what you were talking about. Your numbers seem to be confusing a point.

Manufacturing defects in a Camry? I’m not sure what you are talking about. No 
Camrys involved. Tanks get tested. If you are trying to imply that they are 
dangerous, well so is everything. Risks get managed. Some get managed better 
than others. Batteries have their own risks, too, as does any other energy 
storage mechanism.

Fuel cell lifetime of 2,000 hours? Care to provide a source? It’s just not true.

Electrolysis not very efficient? What do *you* consider “not very efficient”? 
What do you consider acceptable efficiency?

Hydrogen leakage through pipes? What pipes are you talking about? And the basis 
for your assumption that it leaks because it is small?

Tesla battery packs? Yes, very good. Million mile goal? Happy to talk about 
goals. 100% green hydrogen within 10-15 years. Million mile goal? I wish them 
luck. I own stock in the company.

Recycling? Virtually none is happening now. That’s a lot of toxic waste. Fuel 
cells - 99% recycled is what I’ve heard, far exceeding the Tesla goal, today.

What to buy? If a BEV best meets your needs - excellent! I hope you get the 
best one for *you*, and hope that its a Tesla. But don’t make any decisions 
based on wrong information, and on the fuel cell side, there seems to be a lot 
of that that you are considering.

BTW, you mentioned natural gas - if you are in California, your hydrogen 
transportation fuel is likely *not* to be derived from fossil. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:22 AM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> Numbers help.  For instance, an experimental Toyota Camry with three
> carbon wound hydrogen tanks was filled to "700 bar" with hydrogen for
> a range of 300 miles.  Nobody who wants to convey pressure to the
> general public uses bars.  It is always PSI.  700 bar translates to 5
> tons per square inch in a car that weighs less than 2 tons.   One tank
> manufacturing defect and the Camry goes "ballistic" in some direction.
> 
> If hydrogen is made from natural gas, there is always a little CO
> included in the Hydrogen.  That over time corrodes the Fuel Cell.  The
> rough rule of thumb was that the fuel cell would last "2,000 hours".
> At 30 mph, that's 60K miles.  YMMV  That leaves electrolysis which is
> very inefficient.
> 
> Then there is the transport of hydrogen to refueling stations.
> Hydrogen seeps through pipes because it is such a small atom.  If it
> didn't, then you have a whole lot of new infrastructure to build.
> Tanker trucks are another story.  They are capacity limited.
> 
> I keep looking for genuine breakthroughs and I am not finding them.
> Most of what I read is hype.
> 
> Meanwhile, a Tesla pack lasts from  300,000 to 500,000 miles with
> Musk's goal of 1 million miles.  A million miles is 20K miles per year
> for 50 years.  Basically, a lifetime of driving on one pack.
> 
> Tesla has announced a recycling plan where they will be recycling 92
> to 97% of a pack.
> 
> There are too many basic issues with hydrogen fuel cells that have yet
> to be resolved in order to compete with a BEV.
> 
> I'm considering purchasing another EV and a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle
> is not on that list of choices for a lot of fundamental reasons.  I
> have not seen anything in your arguments to dissuade me from a BEV or
> point me to a viable HFCEV vehicle.
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 1:56 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I’m not sure what you want numbers on, but a point can certainly be made 
>> without them, and frequently, numbers can get in the way.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 14, 2021, at 8:47 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Mark, if you wish to present a point, please at least provide numbers in 
>>> your post and a more specific reference. We all have other things to do, 
>>> beside repeat research you've already done.
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>>> 
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
>>> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>>> 
>>> Sent: 14-Aug-21 07:09:30
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
>>> 
>>>> I think focus on that article was not “green” hydrogen, but “blue” 
>>>> hydrogen, made from fo

Re: [EVDL] Solid state hydrogen still isn't as affordable as batteries,

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I’m not understanding this. Your problem is that it produces a profit? And that 
profit might be invested into fossil fuels? Very little of anything would be 
produced if it didn’t make a profit.

And please don’t buy any EVs that are made by anyone but Tesla, because the 
profits will likely be invested in ICEs to some extent. And don’t charge your 
EV in the UK because the largest EV charging company there was bought several 
years ago by the oil company Total.

I really must have missed your point.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 15, 2021, at 7:06 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
>  I watched this video and found that they have solved the compression 
> problem but it is still big oil friendly. That is it will be a process that 
> forces the user to pay into a system that can be manipulated to increase 
> profit. Like refillable natural gas 
> canisters.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEm4mEizns
> This video did not mention KWs so they sort of didn't give a comparison in 
> numbers to batteries but essentially they are making solid state hydrogen 
> storage. I am a bit skeptical because of no apples to apples comparisons. The 
> source hydrogen could be from any source. The advantage seems to be no 
> compression. Lawrence Rhodes
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I’m not sure what you want numbers on, but a point can certainly be made 
without them, and frequently, numbers can get in the way. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 14, 2021, at 8:47 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Mark, if you wish to present a point, please at least provide numbers in 
> your post and a more specific reference. We all have other things to do, 
> beside repeat research you've already done.
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> 
> Sent: 14-Aug-21 07:09:30
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
> 
>> I think focus on that article was not “green” hydrogen, but “blue” hydrogen, 
>> made from fossil with carbon sequestered.
>> 
>> All I’ll say about blue hydrogen is that I share some of your concerns about 
>> the ability to really do it.
>> 
>> On the green side, I think that your numbers are way off.
>> 
>> Do a search for Hydrogen 101 and Jack Brouwer for some interesting numbers. 
>> And I can tell you that in terms of the economics, at least one company that 
>> is building production plants as we speak, believes that they can produce 
>> green hydrogen at a cost competitive with “grey” hydrogen, and within a few 
>> years, competitive with diesel, which is really what we need to compare it 
>> with.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Ok, looking farther down the chart, we have total energy:

Plasma Tech - 8.7 kWh/kg
Compressed H2 - 1.8-6.5 kWh/kg
Liquid - 11.5 kWh/kg
Metal Hydride - 34.8 kWh/kg



- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 14, 2021, at 10:54 AM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> Ok, I wasn’t going to take the bait, but finally broke down.
> 
> Yes, this is all about storage, not production (though they claim to have a 
> magic production technology).
> 
> It sounded all quite interesting, and despite a few seemingly contradictions, 
> was fascinating, and peaked my interest.
> 
> But there’s a chart on the website that seems to conduct claims that it 
> weighs the same or is lighter than what is being put on vehicles.
> 
> I don’t know what Energy K (sub D) is, but it must be some measure of energy.
> 
> His web chart shows 0.05 kWh/kg, compared to compressed at 1.8-6.5 kWh/kg, 
> and liquid at 11.5 kWh/kg. Metal hydride is 10.4 kWh/kg. It looks like there 
> is nowhere near the amount of energy stored compared to even 350 bar gaseous 
> hydrogen.
> 
> That’s not to say that it won’t improve, but his video claims don’t seem to 
> match the data. Or am I misunderstanding something?
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 14, 2021, at 9:04 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEm4mEizns
>> This video did not mention KWs so they sort of didn't give a comparison in 
>> numbers to batteries but essentially they are making solid state hydrogen 
>> storage. I am a bit skeptical because of no apples to apples comparisons. 
>> The source hydrogen could be from any source. The advantage seems to be no 
>> compression. Lawrence Rhodes
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> 
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Ok, I wasn’t going to take the bait, but finally broke down.

Yes, this is all about storage, not production (though they claim to have a 
magic production technology).

It sounded all quite interesting, and despite a few seemingly contradictions, 
was fascinating, and peaked my interest.

 But there’s a chart on the website that seems to conduct claims that it weighs 
the same or is lighter than what is being put on vehicles.

I don’t know what Energy K (sub D) is, but it must be some measure of energy.

His web chart shows 0.05 kWh/kg, compared to compressed at 1.8-6.5 kWh/kg, and 
liquid at 11.5 kWh/kg. Metal hydride is 10.4 kWh/kg. It looks like there is 
nowhere near the amount of energy stored compared to even 350 bar gaseous 
hydrogen.

That’s not to say that it won’t improve, but his video claims don’t seem to 
match the data. Or am I misunderstanding something?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 14, 2021, at 9:04 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEm4mEizns
> This video did not mention KWs so they sort of didn't give a comparison in 
> numbers to batteries but essentially they are making solid state hydrogen 
> storage. I am a bit skeptical because of no apples to apples comparisons. The 
> source hydrogen could be from any source. The advantage seems to be no 
> compression. Lawrence Rhodes
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I will disagree with the first line in your statement “ H2 is not nearly as 
good for cars as batteries”, and repeat what I tell everyone - it depends. If a 
BEV cannot do the job, and meet the duty cycle I need, it clearly isn’t better 
than most anything.

When my wife needed a new car in 2015, I urged her to try one of the limited 
number of BEVs available as a possible option. She took one look at the specs, 
and said emphatically “no.” She bought a fuel cell car instead, which met her 
needs perfectly.

For my work, the same. My driving needs would have precluded a BEV.

I will say that since my wife has retired, and has different needs, I will 
again suggest that she consider a BEV as an option.

H2 not nearly as good? No way, and I can’t understand why anyone would say that.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Larry Gales  wrote:
> 
> 
> Well, H2 is not nearly as good for cars as batteries, but truly green H2 
> (created through electrolysis) certainly can be very clean and could likely 
> be very useful in long range transport (ships, airplanes, and possibly long 
> range trucks).
> 
> It turns out that a recent analysis shows that "blue" H2, produced from 
> natural gas with carbon capture is not clean at all, but true green H2 (from 
> electrolysis) should be very important in the future.  So the headline:
> 
>   Hydrogen isn't green at all
> 
> is very, very wrong.
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 12:31 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV  
>> wrote:
>> Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the 
>> data.
>> 
>> You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, 
>> yes, you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce 
>> electricity to run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not 
>> fossil-derived, and the entire industry is moving towards 100% 
>> “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most believing that “green” hydrogen will be 
>> everywhere very soon.
>> 
>> I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the 
>> use of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG 
>> impacts, the most direct measure is a CI score.
>> 
>> Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while 
>> I get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they 
>> *are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as 
>> low as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.
>> 
>> So who is putting out more GHGs?
>> 
>> This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most 
>> would view the data.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>> > On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>> > 
>> > For Many, Hydrogen Is the Fuel of the Future. New Research Raises Doubts.
>> > https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-pollution.html
>> > 
>> > ...
>> > The main stumbling block: Most hydrogen used today is extracted from 
>> > natural gas in a process that requires a lot of energy and emits vast 
>> > amounts of carbon dioxide. Producing natural gas also releases methane, a 
>> > particularly potent greenhouse gas.
>> > ...
>> > And while the natural gas industry has proposed capturing that carbon 
>> > dioxide — creating what it promotes as emissions-free, “blue” hydrogen — 
>> > even that fuel still emits more across its entire supply chain than simply 
>> > burning natural gas, according to the paper, published Thursday in the 
>> > Energy Science & Engineering journal by researchers from Cornell and 
>> > Stanford Universities.
>> > ...
>> > The researchers assumed that 3.5 percent of the gas drilled from the 
>> > ground leaks into the atmosphere, an assumption that draws on mounting 
>> > research that has found that drilling for natural gas emits far more 
>> > methane than previously known.
>> > 
>> > They also took into account the natural gas required to power the carbon 
>> > capture technology. In all, they found that the greenhouse gas footprint 
>> > of blue hydrogen was more than 20 percent greater than burning natural gas 
>> > or coal for heat.
>> > ...
>> > Jack Brouwer, director of the National Fuel Cell Research Center at the 
>> > University of California, Irvine, said that hydrogen would ultimately need 
>> > to be made using renewable energy to produce what the industry calls g

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Wrong.

You think that fuel cell users go in to their dealer for an annual fuel cell 
change? 

Not the case.

We have two fuel cell cars here, and in about 11 “fuel cell years”, I had a 
fuel cell stack problem once, and it was from a defect.

I’m curious - where did you get such totally wrong information?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2021, at 11:16 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> The elephant in the room is that fuel cells very quickly "wear out" and need 
> to be replaced at great expense. They wear out more quickly than the 
> batteries they replace, which is ironic.
> 
> _If_ you can figure out how to make H2 economically (and with less pollution 
> per mile than electricity) you still need to solve the problem of how to make 
> fuel cells last, and be more economic. As it is now, a vehicle fuel cell 
> lasts about a year before it becomes "poisoned" by the air that it must 
> inhale to combine with the H2 to make electricity.
> 
> What is ironic is that carbon monoxide (CO) in the inhaled air is a serious 
> issue for fuel cell poisoning. Even in tiny amounts.
> Even if they figure out how to make the membrane less damaged by CO, other 
> contaminants in the inhaled air, and in the H2 fuel, chemically link onto the 
> fuel cell membranes or coat them and the fuel cell degrades over time. This 
> is the nature of system that must be fueled by external gases. Contaminants 
> are inevitable. It is very expensive to replace or rebuild the fuel cell. 
> They are, in essence, a big catalytic converter with the same expensive and 
> exotic metals involved.
> 
> A fuel cell is just a _very_ complicated battery that has an external 
> electrolyte source, after all. If you remove the fuel cell when it dies, and 
> replace it with a less complicated and less expensive battery, you will be 
> back to a nice BEV car. You can charge this from any electrical outlet at 
> home and not have to go to a fueling station. You can charge it from a solar 
> panel, or a wind mill.
> 
> A big advantage of a BEV is that you can park it inside if you like. You 
> can't park a fuel cell vehicle in an ordinary garage or a parking garage. 
> High pressure H2 is a no go for such spaces. The H2 can possibly leak and 
> then it rises and hugs the ceiling in enclosed places. You garage door opener 
> can touch off a hydrogen explosion if this happens. Thus, no indoor parking 
> allowed with a fuel cell vehicle.
> 
> Bill D.
> 
> 
>> On 8/14/2021 2:24 AM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:
>> You’ve completely ignored what I said - did you even read it?
>> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I think focus on that article was not “green” hydrogen, but “blue” hydrogen, 
made from fossil with carbon sequestered.

All I’ll say about blue hydrogen is that I share some of your concerns about 
the ability to really do it.

On the green side, I think that your numbers are way off.

Do a search for Hydrogen 101 and Jack Brouwer for some interesting numbers. And 
I can tell you that in terms of the economics, at least one company that is 
building production plants as we speak, believes that they can produce green 
hydrogen at a cost competitive with “grey” hydrogen, and within a few years, 
competitive with diesel, which is really what we need to compare it with.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2021, at 9:26 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> The only conclusion drawn by the authors is that it is not cost effective to 
> produce "green" hydrogen, meaning hydrogen produced from electrolysis using 
> electricity generated from some non carbon producing source. They also state 
> the fact that, today, almost all hydrogen is produced from natural gas.
> 
> I completely stand by that conclusion.
> 
> While it's theoretically possible to produce "decarbonized" hydrogen, it 
> can't be done on a commercial scale, let alone a scale large enough to power 
> America's transportation system. If we were to do so, we would have to build 
> some tens of thousands of terawatts of wind and solar electricity production 
> (or nuclear, I suppose). Out of that production, roughly 50% of the energy 
> would be lost in process of electrolysis and then electricity from a fuel 
> cell. Until we have so much excess "clean" electricity, it's more economical 
> and more efficient to use that to power homes, businesses, and industry 
> connected to the grid ... and EVs, where the loss is much less than 50%, more 
> like 10-20%.
> 
> At some point, we'll probably have enough large scale excess that it makes 
> sense to produce hydrogen with that excess. But, I believe, the primary use 
> for that hydrogen will be for backup grid power generation, not 
> transportation. At that point, we'll be able to have a 100% clean grid and a 
> grid capable of charging EVs across the country !
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> 
> Sent: 13-Aug-21 00:11:06
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
> 
>> Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the 
>> data.
>> 
>> You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, 
>> yes, you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce 
>> electricity to run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not 
>> fossil-derived, and the entire industry is moving towards 100% 
>> “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most believing that “green” hydrogen will be 
>> everywhere very soon.
>> 
>> I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the 
>> use of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG 
>> impacts, the most direct measure is a CI score.
>> 
>> Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while 
>> I get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they 
>> *are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as 
>> low as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.
>> 
>> So who is putting out more GHGs?
>> 
>> This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most 
>> would view the data.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
 On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> For Many, Hydrogen Is the Fuel of the Future. New Research Raises Doubts.
>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-pollution.html
>>> 
>>> ...
>>> The main stumbling block: Most hydrogen used today is extracted from 
>>> natural gas in a process that requires a lot of energy and emits vast 
>>> amounts of carbon dioxide. Producing natural gas also releases methane, a 
>>> particularly potent greenhouse gas.
>>> ...
>>> And while the natural gas industry has proposed capturing that carbon 
>>> dioxide — creating what it promotes as emissions-free, “blue” hydrogen — 
>>> even that fuel still emits more across its entire supply chain than simply 
>>> burning natural gas, according to the paper, published Thursday in the 
>>> Energy Science & Engineering journal by researchers from Cornell and 
>>> Stanford Universities.
>>> ...
>>> The researchers assumed that 3.5 percent of the gas drilled from the ground 
>>> leaks into the atmosphere, an assumption that draws on mounting research 
>>> that has found that drilling for natural gas emits far more methane than 
>>> previously known.
>>> 
>>> They also took into account the natural gas required 

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I absolutely *can* look at grid numbers for renewables for EV's and also tell 
you that my hydrogen comes from renewables, if you want to look it that way.

My renewable % number comes from data for the *only* place that I can get it - 
at the pump. I can’t buy it from hydrogen supplied to refineries or other 
industrial users.

On the other hand, your number for EV owners that have solar or subscribe to 
100% renewable electricity are only a piece of a very complicated puzzle, as a 
recent CARB workshop and other surveys and studies have shown. 

How many of the 84% are primarily charging at home? That varies, even based on 
the make or model of EV you drive.

Are you arguing that they don’t charge elsewhere? Even if the data showed that 
(unlikely), the data shows that the biggest barrier to buying an EV is lack of 
infrastructure (according to the California Energy Commission). So is this 
percentage dropping precipitously as California spends billions in EV 
infrastructure, as these people now buy BEVs.

Add into the mix that 50% of Californians live in multi-unit housing. So are 
you arguing that most of them have solar or 100% renewable?

And maybe more importantly, *when* are people charging? The data shows the 
peaks are when the grid has the least renewable content. So are those who 
bought 100% renewable using that entire 11% grid renewables, and the rest using 
non-renewables during that peak?

You really can’t draw a conclusion from the number you cited, even if accurate. 
And if you want to try, it’s less favorable to your attempt to paint a rosy 
picture.

Also, if you want to talk about efficiency, which really is only one element of 
a calculation of GHG gases (so why bother), why try to compare a number (real 
or not) that looks at use of electricity (it’s unclear what losses you include 
or exclude, so I’ll exclude it to your benefit), and not production and use. 
That’s what a fuel cell does, it produces the electricity onboard.

Lastly, and maybe I’ve buried the headline from my response to Peri, the 
“dirtiness” in the study comes from increasing the emission estimates in the 
natural gas supply chain - the same natural gas that is used to charge BEVs! 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2021, at 8:20 AM, Robert Bruninga  wrote:
> 
> One cannot look just at grid numbers for renewables for EV's any more
> than one can claim their
> hydrogen comes from renewables.  Survey's have shown that 85% of EV
> drivers either have solar
> or subscribe for 100% renewable electricity.
> 
> Of course, by the same token, it is great that you buy only renewables
> generated hydrogen.
> But the process is so inefficient that it robs the rest of us of that
> renewable energy to elimionae
> worse fossil fuel systems.  Something near 50% when the cost of
> compressing the hydrogen
> into a tank is included.  FAR from a good idea when renewable electric
> generation for cars
> from solar wind, and hydro approach 95% efficiency..
> 
> And the difference between 50% and 95% is not close to 50%, it is
> colower to 90% since
> the 5% losses at 95% efficiency is TEN times less than the losses at 50%
> 
> bob
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 3:31 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the 
>> data.
>> 
>> You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, 
>> yes, you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce 
>> electricity to run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not 
>> fossil-derived, and the entire industry is moving towards 100% 
>> “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most believing that “green” hydrogen will be 
>> everywhere very soon.
>> 
>> I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the 
>> use of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG 
>> impacts, the most direct measure is a CI score.
>> 
>> Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while 
>> I get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they 
>> *are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as 
>> low as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.
>> 
>> So who is putting out more GHGs?
>> 
>> This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most 
>> would view the data.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> For Many, Hydrogen Is the Fuel of the Future. New Research Raises Doubts.
>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

You’ve completely ignored what I said - did you even read it?

As far as the economics, not only will it not take a miracle to make “green” 
hydrogen more economical than fossil hydrogen, but at least one company is 
building production plants that they say will make it competitive in cost, and 
then improve it further. The technology is improving quickly, and as the cost 
of renewables drop, the production costs also drop, as that is the biggest 
driver of costs.

As far as your comment of being ahead with electricity being stored in a 
battery, I think your looking at it the wrong way in two (if not more) 
important ways (and I won’t even get into battery production and recycling 
issues that don’t get taken into account).  First, a battery doesn’t meet all 
duty cycle needs, which is why for some uses you need hydrogen even if you 
prefer batteries. The alternative is fossil fuel combustion in an IC engine. 
That’s why most of see fuels cell electrics as complementary to BEVs, not 
either/or. Secondly, and maybe more to your point, electricity, like hydrogen, 
gets produced in many ways. The GREET model, which is generally accepted as the 
gold standard for calculating GHG comparisons, If I’m remembering correctly, 
shows both BEVs and FCEVs reducing GHGs as compared to fossil combustion ICEs, 
no matter the input energy.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2021, at 5:14 AM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> Here is an article published today on "Clean Hydrogen". (Not so clean, 
> according to the article. surprise surprise )
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/12/clean-fuel-blue-hydrogen-coal-study
>  
> 
> From _all_ I've read, even in Scientific American, you are way ahead simply 
> using plain old electricity instead of hydrogen, if you wish to curtail 
> climate change. Electricity for running a vehicle is much more economic, and 
> is far more ecological than hydrogen. At least for the foreseeable future.
> 
> All but the tiniest fraction of hydrogen produced these days comes from 
> fossil fuel. This is because it is by far the most economic way to produce 
> hydrogen. Even so, it is _still_ far more expensive to run a car with the 
> cheapest H2 than run it directly with electricity stored in batteries.
> 
> Perhaps someone, somewhere, will invent some miraculous possess that will 
> turn the tables completely, but that simply hasn't happened yet.
> 
> The US government is going to throw another $8bn down this black hole. If 
> $8bn isn't enough to buy that miracle cure, then perhaps it will be time to 
> give H2 the last rites and finally move on.
> 
> Bill D.
> 
>> On 8/13/2021 7:11 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:
>> Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the 
>> data.
>> 
>> You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, 
>> yes, you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce 
>> electricity to run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not 
>> fossil-derived, and the entire industry is moving towards 100% 
>> “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most believing that “green” hydrogen will be 
>> everywhere very soon.
>> 
>> I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the 
>> use of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG 
>> impacts, the most direct measure is a CI score.
>> 
>> Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while 
>> I get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they 
>> *are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as 
>> low as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.
>> 
>> So who is putting out more GHGs?
>> 
>> This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most 
>> would view the data.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> T INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the data.

You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, yes, 
you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce electricity to 
run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not fossil-derived, and the 
entire industry is moving towards 100% “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most 
believing that “green” hydrogen will be everywhere very soon.

I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the use 
of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG impacts, 
the most direct measure is a CI score.

Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while I 
get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they 
*are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as low 
as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.

So who is putting out more GHGs?

This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most 
would view the data.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> For Many, Hydrogen Is the Fuel of the Future. New Research Raises Doubts.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-pollution.html
> 
> ...
> The main stumbling block: Most hydrogen used today is extracted from natural 
> gas in a process that requires a lot of energy and emits vast amounts of 
> carbon dioxide. Producing natural gas also releases methane, a particularly 
> potent greenhouse gas.
> ...
> And while the natural gas industry has proposed capturing that carbon dioxide 
> — creating what it promotes as emissions-free, “blue” hydrogen — even that 
> fuel still emits more across its entire supply chain than simply burning 
> natural gas, according to the paper, published Thursday in the Energy Science 
> & Engineering journal by researchers from Cornell and Stanford Universities.
> ...
> The researchers assumed that 3.5 percent of the gas drilled from the ground 
> leaks into the atmosphere, an assumption that draws on mounting research that 
> has found that drilling for natural gas emits far more methane than 
> previously known.
> 
> They also took into account the natural gas required to power the carbon 
> capture technology. In all, they found that the greenhouse gas footprint of 
> blue hydrogen was more than 20 percent greater than burning natural gas or 
> coal for heat.
> ...
> Jack Brouwer, director of the National Fuel Cell Research Center at the 
> University of California, Irvine, said that hydrogen would ultimately need to 
> be made using renewable energy to produce what the industry calls green 
> hydrogen, which uses renewable energy to split water into its constituent 
> parts, hydrogen and oxygen. That, he said, would eliminate the fossil and the 
> methane leaks.
> ...
> Today, very little hydrogen is green, because the process involved — 
> electrolyzing water to separate hydrogen atoms from oxygen — is hugely energy 
> intensive. In most places, there simply isn’t enough renewable energy to 
> produce vast amounts of green hydrogen. (Although if the world does start to 
> produce excess renewable energy, converting it to hydrogen would be one way 
> to store it.)
> ...
> 
> ---
> 
> I'm glad to see this published mainstream. People don't seem to think about 
> the source for hydrogen, only about the the aspect of filling a tank in a few 
> minutes and driving off. Long live EVs !!!
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Centenaries for trucks

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

The testing approval occurred at about the same as Edison was taking it’s time 
in restoring power to parts of Los Angeles where lines were down, leading a 
County Supervisor, whose District was impacted, to oppose it, and to comment, 
“when you get into bed with Edison, you wake up with more than a good night’s 
sleep”.

Yes, he really said it - I was there.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 3, 2021, at 7:14 PM, Haudy Kazemi via EV  wrote:
> 
> There are additional complications to consider, such as oversize loads on
> those same roads, and consequences of crashes. If a crash knocks out a
> catenary, I'd guess the safety fuse for that section of roadway would
> blow...which then would stop any vehicles without at least some onboard
> batteries.
> 
> Railroads have a lot of control over the railcars traveling on their rail
> lines. Highway departments have less control over highway vehicles.
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021, 21:06 Mark Abramowitz via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> There was a one or two mile test of a catenary system near the ports in
>> Los Angeles several years ago, using Siemens technology.
>> 
>> The pilot project had an interesting twist - the pantograph would be
>> connected for a portion of the trip, and then the truck would operate
>> normally under whatever normally powered it - diesel or natural gas.
>> 
>> There are videos of the system in operation, but the problem was that
>> there were constant problems in even constructing the overhead wire system.
>> If anyone is interested, there must be a final report or summary out there
>> someplace.
>> 
>> The Siemens guys were nice, the project - less so.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 3, 2021, at 12:02 PM, Peri Hartman via EV 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What if Highways Were Electric? Germany Is Testing the Idea.
>>> 
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/03/business/electric-trucks-catenary-wire.html#commentsContainer
>>> 
>>> There’s a debate over how to make the trucking industry free of
>> emissions, and whether batteries or hydrogen fuel cells are the best way to
>> fire up electric motors in big vehicles. Mr. Schmieder was part of a test

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Centenaries for trucks

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

There was a one or two mile test of a catenary system near the ports in Los 
Angeles several years ago, using Siemens technology.

The pilot project had an interesting twist - the pantograph would be connected 
for a portion of the trip, and then the truck would operate normally under 
whatever normally powered it - diesel or natural gas.

There are videos of the system in operation, but the problem was that there 
were constant problems in even constructing the overhead wire system. If anyone 
is interested, there must be a final report or summary out there someplace.

The Siemens guys were nice, the project - less so. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 3, 2021, at 12:02 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> What if Highways Were Electric? Germany Is Testing the Idea.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/03/business/electric-trucks-catenary-wire.html#commentsContainer
> 
> There’s a debate over how to make the trucking industry free of emissions, 
> and whether batteries or hydrogen fuel cells are the best way to fire up 
> electric motors in big vehicles. Mr. Schmieder was part of a test of a third 
> alternative: a system that feeds electricity to trucks as they drive, using 
> wires strung above the roadway and a pantograph mounted on the cab.
> ...
> And the system is relatively simple. Siemens, the German electronics giant 
> that provided the hardware for this test route, adapted equipment that has 
> been used for decades to drive trains and urban street cars.
> ...
> So far the sections of highway equipped with overhead cable in Germany are 
> short — about three miles long in both directions near Frankfurt. Their 
> purpose is to test how the system performs in everyday use by real trucking 
> companies hauling real goods. By the end of the year more than 20 trucks will 
> be using the systems in Germany.
> ...
> Longer term, according to Siemens figures, 4,000 kilometers of wired highway, 
> or nearly 2,500 miles, would accommodate 60 percent of German truck traffic.
> ...
> But the onus would be on the German government to build the overhead cables, 
> which cost an estimated 2.5 million euros per kilometer, or about $5 million 
> per mile.
> ...
> But, responding to questions from The New York Times, the ministry noted that 
> batteries are getting cheaper and better all the time, and charging times are 
> dropping. “In the final analysis the total cost of infrastructure, vehicles 
> and energy will decide what technology or combination of technologies 
> prevails,” the ministry said.
> ...
> The cables also recharged the Scania’s battery, which stores enough power to 
> drive short distances emission-free in urban traffic. That is another 
> advantage of the catenary system:  The eHighway could eliminate the need for 
> charging stops, important in the trucking industry where time is money.
> 
> -
> 
> The fact that Tesla nearly has a semi tractor capable of many long haul 
> routes leads me to believe the battery solution will win. Nonetheless, it's 
> great to see this experiment happening.
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Why not an open source EV?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Fascinating idea, but even if you used commodity parts, don’t they change 
anyway over time? 

What’s the current status of those parts that you used, and of the project?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Aug 1, 2021, at 9:39 AM, (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
> 
> This was our philosophy when we developed our electric van at Maxwell.  We
> wanted to make sure that all parts we used are not only the most robust and
> efficient ones available, but also readily available and will be for years
> into the future.  We started with a base vehicle that's available
> world-wide.  Our target market is fleet customers and they would be very
> reluctant to own something that was hard to maintain because parts are hard
> to get.  We also designed the whole system so everything is easily
> accessible and quick to swap.  The entire powertrain with all EV components
> (other than the battery) can easily pop out of the vehicle with only 3
> mount points.  We call this the "superframe".  If we are dealing with a
> remote service issue, we can just ship them a whole replacement superframe
> on a pallet, which they can swap in quickly, then return the old one to us
> for service.   Even though we have excellent diagnostics, this makes it
> easy to quickly quash something like an intermittent problem that may be
> experienced by a mechanic without a lot of EV experience.  We also used the
> best EV drivetrain on the market, the most efficient one, the most proven
> one, and the one with the most production globally.  (The same one used in
> the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y)
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 6:44 AM Collin Kidder via EV 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> That does lead to another potential idea, though. What if an open
>> source design specifically called for OEM parts that *ARE* easily
>> available and cheap? This isn't so far-fetched or weird. Tesla uses
>> Mercedes steering systems and a Ford accelerator pedal. They probably
>> use other parts from existing cars that I'm just not aware of. What if
>> an open design used parts from other cars and the real open source
>> magic was the layout that integrates it all together? I have no idea
>> if a frame could reasonably be constructed custom. But, existing OEM
>> frames and/or rolling chassis do exist. Control systems for OEM
>> components also already exist. The OpenInverter project has a lot of
>> custom boards to control things from Tesla, Nissan, etc.
>> 
>> The big problem here is probably one of scalability. You can put the
>> plans together and tell people to buy a Bosch iBooster for their
>> breaks and a Mercedes steering rack, ford accelerator pedal, Nissan
>> Leaf drivetrain with an OpenInverter control board, etc, but can 100
>> people actually get those parts? 1000 people? These things exist but
>> can they be found in sufficient quantities to make it worthwhile to
>> do?
>> 
>>> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 4:56 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Nice sentiment boss man but in mass production a power window is cheaper
>> to engineer and produce than a crank up window unless you use the old
>> fashion railway windows you lift up and down by muscle gravity...you might
>> not know what I'm talking about these are so old. So the idea of
>> simplifying in the way you think is again going back to the notion of
>> carrying a horse with you in case you run out of gas. The cost of our
>> gadgets is trivial in mass production. Might as well go with it. I can
>> replace my electric power mirrors for $20. When it malfunctions or breaks
>> off I replace it. Three 10mm nuts. EVerything on cars is like that now. All
>> neatly in a row with a part number and made in the millions. Available on
>> eBay.com. The only thing I wish for is no proprietary parts. When you want
>> a turn signal just one assembly. Bumper one assembly...etc..air
>> conditioning unit...one choice...would be a lot cheaper and easier.
>> Lawrence Rhodes
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: 

Re: [EVDL] toyota is still a laggard

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Toyota has been dealing themselves many self-inflicted wounds, some of them 
outlined in the article. 

I work with people from Toyota regularly, and am frequently surprised.

But I’m really surprised at some of the misleading information that the article 
includes about hydrogen. I’ll leave it at that.

Perhaps if more interest is Toyota’s push for more dependence on hybrids in the 
short term.  For decades now, I’ve been antagonistic towards hybrids as a clean 
air technology, preferring a stronger push to zero emissions, and  in recent 
years, eliminating all incentives to purchase hybrids.

But a recent piece posted on LinkedIn by the CEO of Toyota Research Institute 
has started to make me want to re-think my long-held view. 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-6823377504531808256-lBUY

I’m not ready to do drastically change my view without a lot more thought, but 
found the piece interesting enough to merit done consideration. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jul 30, 2021, at 6:37 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Toyota Led on Clean Cars. Now Critics Say It Works to Delay Them.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/25/climate/toyota-electric-hydrogen.html
> 
> The Toyota Prius hybrid was a milestone in the history of clean cars, 
> attracting millions of buyers worldwide who could do their part for the 
> environment while saving money on gasoline.
> 
> But in recent months, Toyota, one of the world’s largest automakers, has 
> quietly become the industry’s strongest voice opposing an all-out transition 
> to electric vehicles —
> ...
> Behind that position is a business quandary: Even as other automakers have 
> embraced electric cars, Toyota bet its future on the development of hydrogen 
> fuel cells — a costlier technology that has fallen far behind electric 
> batteries — with greater use of hybrids in the near term. That means a rapid 
> shift from gasoline to electric on the roads could be devastating for the 
> company’s market share and bottom line.
> ...
> Together with other automakers, Toyota also sided with the Trump 
> administration in a battle with California over the Clean Air Act and sued 
> Mexico over fuel efficiency rules. In Japan, Toyota officials argued against 
> carbon taxes.
> ...
> Toyota, a major sponsor of the Tokyo Olympics, has used that platform to 
> promote its message of sustainability. Hydrogen fueled the Olympic torch for 
> part of its journey, and Toyota’s fleet of sleek Mirai hydrogen fuel cell 
> cars have been whisking Olympic dignitaries around Tokyo.
> 
> Toyota is promoting itself as strongly backing a green transition, but in 
> effect, it is opposing efforts that others say are crucial to a swift green 
> transition.
> ...
> On paper, Toyota’s approach to zero-emissions vehicles, the hydrogen fuel 
> cell, is a dream: Unlike battery-powered electric vehicles, these cars carry 
> hydrogen tanks and fuel cells that turn the hydrogen into electricity. They 
> refuel and accelerate quickly, and can travel for several hundred miles on a 
> tank, emitting only water vapor. And hydrogen, theoretically, is abundant.
> 
> But a high sticker price, as well as lack of refueling infrastructure, has 
> hampered the growth of a hydrogen economy, at least for passenger cars.
> ...
> The automaker, based in Toyota City, Japan, has begun lagging behind in fuel 
> efficiency across its entire fleet, as it has pushed sales of larger trucks 
> and sports-utility vehicles, which bring bigger profit margins. Environmental 
> Protection Agency figures show that Toyota has made relatively little 
> progress on fuel economy over the past five years, going from an industry 
> leader to part of the bottom tier, along with General Motors and Ford.
> ...
> There are several factors that could ultimately force Toyota’s hand. For one, 
> China, an important market for Toyota, has moved aggressively to require 
> automakers there to make electric vehicles. That has spurred Toyota to start 
> producing electric cars under a joint venture.
> ...
> 
> --
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

[EVDL] FTC vote on “Right to Repair” enforcement

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

https://www.wired.com/story/ftc-votes-to-enforce-right-to-repair/

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Green car reports - illegible?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I’m so glad Peri mentioned ADA.

A minor change in how you characterize your difficulty might have an impact.

Recognizing that we are not talking about a government agency or a governnent 
funded organization, it may be nonetheless illustrative to note that Federal 
agencies have website guidelines that incorporate accessibility criteria so 
that those who cannot fully access due to disabilities can use their websites.

But that information plus mention of the ADA might provide incentive for them 
to fix their site. If you have time for research, see if anyone has sued about 
websites under the ADA.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jun 8, 2021, at 12:41 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> In the name of aesthetics, so many web designers choose color combinations 
> that look pretty but are sometimes illegible. I can read the light green font 
> for links, but it's hard. And, if outside, probably not at all.
> 
> Another example is google search. Years ago, after clicking a search result, 
> the link would change to a different color. That made it easy to see which 
> links had been viewed and which not. Nowadays, if there is a change in color, 
> I can't see it.
> 
> If a designer is going to do these things, why can't they also offer a high 
> contrast setting ! Maybe it's time for the ADA people to step in. :)
> 
> Peri
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Steves via EV" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Cc: "Steves" 
> Sent: 08-Jun-21 10:43:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Green car reports - illegible?
> 
>> I had the same trouble with the Washington Post and complained (to no 
>> avail). Are you red/green color blind? I don’t think designers take that 
>> Into account. On our Bolt, the seat heater shows the heat level with tiny 
>> red (I think) dots. I can’t see them.
>> 
>> -Steve
>> 
 On Jun 8, 2021, at 1:26 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV  
 wrote:
>>> 
>>> I subscribe to Green Car Reports and really enjoy their news and
>>> their format.  But I simply cannot see/read their embedded links.
>>> They use a light green font for links and I have to hold my laptop
>>> up to my eyes or use a magnifier to be able to read the link.
>>> 
>>> I have emailed my objection to their low-contrast light-green color
>>> and font but to no avail.  But then I am just one man complaining.
>>> 
>>> Maybe if you get Green Car Reports and you also find it hard to
>>> read the embedded light-green-links, maybe you too would
>>> be willing to send them a note of feedback.
>>> 
>>> Just say'in
>>> Bob
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] exxon finally got the memo

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

To paraphrase Mark Twain, news of their demise is greatly exaggerated.

“ demand for oil and gas for transportation, power generation and plastics is 
not disappearing overnight. Wisely managed money will be made there.”

All this being said, it will also be a transition for those that see the names 
of oil companies, and presume that whatever the subject, it must be evil. 

The transition has been happening for awhile - Total’s purchase of the largest 
EV charging network in the UK is one example.

Yet many are dabbling, or even committed and providing new leadership to an 
energy transition, but not fast enough. Shell is a great example.


- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Jun 2, 2021, at 7:47 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Here's another article about the demise of petroleum extraction.
> 
> The ‘Mean Greens’ Are Forcing Exxon to Clean Up Its Act
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/01/opinion/exxon-mobil-board.html
> 
> ...
> One that most glaringly did not is the one that in 2013 was the biggest 
> public company in the world! It’s ExxonMobil.
> ...
> Exxon lost over $20 billion last year, suffered a credit rating downgrade, 
> might have to borrow billions just to pay its dividend, has seen its share 
> price over the last decade produce a minus-30 percent return and was booted 
> from the Dow Jones industrial average.
> But last week — finally — Exxon got the memo, in the form of a shareholder 
> revolt in what was one of the most consequential weeks in the history of the 
> oil and gas industry and shareholder capitalism.
> ...
> At Exxon’s annual meeting, Engine No. 1 offered up a slate for four new 
> members of Exxon’s 12-member board. The four represent deep energy expertise 
> and climate solutions. The slate committed to push the oil giant to a 
> net-zero emissions strategy by 2050, more investments in clean energy systems 
> and more transparency about Exxon’s energy transition, with metrics and 
> milestones, as well as disclosure of its lobbying payments and partners, 
> suspected of undermining the science around climate change.
> ...
> Exxon’s existing board was noteworthy for one thing: Other than the C.E.O., 
> it had one member — appointed only this year — who I would call an energy 
> expert, and none steeped in climate expertise that could help the company 
> adapt.
> ...
> Karsner, the other Engine No. 1 nominees and Engine No. 1 itself are out to 
> strengthen Exxon, not destroy it. They view it as one of the world’s greatest 
> collections of scientific and engineering talent.
> ...
> they think Exxon has got to stop betting that the good ole days of oil and 
> gas profits will return ... not only investing more in future carbon capture, 
> batteries and other renewables, but also using its engineering prowess to 
> invent that future — while it still has an income stream from oil and gas.
> ...
> 
> 
> Peri
> 
> 
> 
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] Vandalism charge for charging EV?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Remembering that you are there, I think that Glenn’s idea is better. If it 
doesn’t work, I would talk to hotel manager.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 30, 2021, at 6:13 PM, Glenn Brooks via EV  wrote:
> 
> Another approach- go talk with the hotel valet/parking manager. See what he 
> can do.  Often the hotel parking garages in multi unit destinations are 
> contracted out. The security staff have little to no capability, and 
> sometimes  no interest, in problem solving.  
> 
> The parking Manager is likely the only person in the parking operation that 
> coordinates with guests or the hotels.
> 
> Glenn 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On May 30, 2021, at 6:05 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> I would suspect that the Tesla owned by the hotel manager, (or someone in a 
>> position of power.)
>> 
>> They get a premium parking slot for their car, with charging, plus a guard! 
>> Then write it off to the hotel and advertise it as a "perk" to customers.
>> 
>> I would send a complaint to Hilton headquarters.
>> 
>> Bill D.
>> 
>> 
 On 5/31/2021 8:29 AM, Mark Hanson via EV wrote:
>>> Hi folks
>>> I’m at 1 Beach drive Myrtle Beach listed on EV Hotels/PlugShare as an 
>>> EV destination hotel.  They have a large parking garage servicing several 
>>> hotels with only two charging stations , one J1772 and one Tesla.  After 
>>> paying $1100 for 3 nights I was told by the guard if I parked next to the 
>>> other Tesla (that has been charged for two days) and moved the cable, I 
>>> would be charged with Vandalism!   Have you ever heard of that ?  He also 
>>> said he would NOT contact either car owner in the hotel and ask them to 
>>> move their cars that were fully charged.  He said to go to a public pay for 
>>> charging station.  Next time I’ll just stay in a cheaper non EV rated hotel 
>>> and charge with the general riff raff.
>>> Stay charged
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> ___
>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

[EVDL] Electrify America performance

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

A number of folks have expressed dissatisfaction with VW (Electrify America) 
charging infrastructure.

This meeting tomorrow morning may provide an opportunity to comment on the 
shortfalls of their infrastructure.


CARB Public Meeting to solicit comments on Electrify America’s California 
progress, 9:00 to 11:30 AM, 
https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/2244722672100355596

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] NEV is a stoopid idea. Moped is better

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

It’s amazing what civil unrest accomplished in China.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 24, 2021, at 3:14 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV  
> wrote:
> 
> On 24 May 2021 at 11:26, Larry Gales via EV wrote:
> 
>> The smaller you make a gas vehicle, the uglier, noisier, dirtier, they
>> become . In addition, they are proportionally less efficient.  So small gas
>> vehicles are generally a bad idea: they are responsible for much of the
>> horrific pollution you see in much of asia.
> 
> This is true in practice, but I don't think it's inherent to their size.  
> They COULD be clean and quiet, even with ICEVs.  However, that's usually not 
> required by law, so the manufacturers don't bother.  
> 
> From what I've read, the engines usually fitted are of crude design, with 
> little or no emission control.  I'd guess air cooled with poppet or pushrod 
> valves, simple carburetors, and mechanical ignition systems.  I know that a 
> fair number of Tuktuks are powered by two-stroke engines.  Some, I think, 
> are Diesel. They're gross polluters, and noisy to boot.
> 
> The reason that EV is better for these uses is the same reason that it's 
> better for all road transportation.  The only difference is that normal
> passenger ICEVs have evolved significantly and have mandated emission 
> controls, so the improvement for them isn't quite as dramatic.
> 
>> Right now, the only type of micro electric vehicle that is surging in
>> a major way, is the electric bike. But I believe that NEVs should also
>> become a major part of the mix.  
> 
> E-bikes were the first EV sucess story of our time, from about the 1990s.  
> 
> IMO the key to that success is that they're cheap.  That's because they sell 
> in large volumes in Asia, particularly China.  Economy of scale, 
> competition, and cheap sweatshop labor have driven the price down to where 
> you can get an fairly decent E-bike for well under $1k.
> 
> E-bikes are so cheap that for many middle income folks they can almost be an 
> impulse purchase.  It's a hobby or fun weekend vehicle at almost a toy 
> price.  If you're the right kind of person, it can even be a commuter.
> 
> But the most important factor is that E-bike cost is in line with their
> utility.  Yeah, that $700 E-bike does a lot less than a car, but it costs 
> about 1/30 as much as an "entry level" car.
> 
> An NEV also does less than a car, but more than an E-bike.  For one thing, 
> it keeps you dry!  (Or should.)  You should be able to sell one if you price 
> it in line with its level of utility.  
> 
> And that's a problem.  I can tell you that in the early 2000s, NEVs priced 
> at (IIRC) $7-10k didn't sell in significant numbers.  Part of that may be 
> because they looked like (and were) glorified golf cars.  But I think that a 
> big reason is that they were just too close to the price of low-end ICEVs, 
> while being far less practical and comfortable.
> 
> Still true today.  Right now in France you can get a basic 2-seat 5hp 
> Renault Twizy EV (doors optional!) that will go 28mph.  It costs just over 
> 10k euros.  Or you can buy a 4-seat Twingo ICEV for 13.5k euros, close the 
> (standard) doors, and take it up to 100mph, if you're brave enough. 
> 
> You know who in France buys a Twizy instead of a Twingo?  People who've lost 
> their driving licenses from drunk driving, because in France you can drive a 
> 28mph car without a driving license.  (Really.)  
> 
> It's not just perception of value.  An NEV *is* low valiue compared to the 
> cheapest ICEV.  It only carries 2 people and minimal cargo.  You can't take 
> it on most roads.  To get across town without the innerbelt, you have to 
> pull out the map and plot a course that here in the Midwest often goes 
> through rough neighborhoods - at 25 mph.  
> 
> So if an NEV is going to have anything close to the success that E-bikes 
> have had, it has to be cheap, in line with its value as transportation.
> 
> How cheap?  I don't know.  You'd have to study the market, survey vehicle 
> buyers.  But a wild, irresponsible guess might be around $5k, maybe $7k.
> 
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
> 
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
> 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> I think [Rio de Janeiro mayor Marcelo] Crivella will be 
> remembered as a mayor to be forgotten.
> 
> -- Alvaro Costa e Silva
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to 

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 103, Issue 24

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Forklifts and floor scrubbers need not run on natural gas or propane. There are 
both battery electric and fuel cell electric hybrid equipment available in that 
category with zero emissions.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 24, 2021, at 2:23 PM, Lee Hart via EV  wrote:
> 
> Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote:
> From: Larry Gales 
>> The smaller you make a gas vehicle, the uglier, noisier, dirtier,
>> they become . In addition, they are proportionally less efficient.
> 
> Indeed, that has been the general pattern. Small vehicles are cheap
> vehicles, and the emission standards have been written to allow them to
> pollute proportionately more (i.e. "gram per mile"). So manufacturers
> don't produce, and customers won't buy low-pollution small vehicles
> because they would cost more. This problem applies to *all* small
> engines; motorbikes, lawn mowers, etc.
> 
> But there are examples of "clean" small engines. Some use fuel
> injection, catalytic converters, and other known techniques to reduce
> pollution. There are also indoor vehicles, like forklifts and floor
> scrubbers, that run on propane or natural gas to reduce pollution.
> 
>> But electric vehicles downsize beautifully: they are always quiet,
>> clean, and very efficient. Given that 75% of all trips we make in
>> cars today are within 10 miles, and the average number of people in
>> a car is 1.7, very small electric vehicles could make a major
>> difference in our cities.
> 
> They certainly can be! But I suspect manufacturers are hard at work to find 
> ways to make full-size EVs that are every bit as big, heavy, complicated, 
> expensive, and hard to repair as regular ICE vehicles. That's what it will 
> take to maintain their business model!
> 
>> Right now, the only type of micro electric vehicle that is surging in
>> a major way, is the electric bike. But I believe that NEVs should
>> also become a major part of the mix.
> 
> That seems to be the case in many other parts of the world. But in the US, 
> EVs of any type are pretty rare. I doubt that electric bikes and NEVs have 
> much less than 1% of the market.
> 
> It's not an engineering problem; it's a marketing problem. Right now, most 
> "good 'ol boys" wouldn't be caught dead in a micro-car. Someone has to find a 
> way to make small vehicles (and especially EVs) "fashionable".
> 
> For example: I have observed that golf cars often come in fancy versions, 
> with elaborate styling and luxury features. They have air conditioning, 
> satellite radio, leather seats, and just about anything else you'd find on a 
> luxury car. You can buy ones that look like a Rolls Royce, Ferrari, HummVee, 
> '57 Thunderbird, and all sorts of exotica. The people buying and driving them 
> don't seem to care if they're EVs or not; they just want the "looks" styling 
> to impress others!
> 
> Lee Hart
> 
> -- 
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we
> created them. -- Albert Einstein
> --
> Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com
> 
> -- 
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] small UPS

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

If you are looking for one that small (I’m not sure exactly the size of mine - 
it may be smaller) you can have it for free.

It has just sat in a box, so I don’t know if the battery is any good, but the 
electronics should still be fine.

You just have to pick it up. I’m in Orange County.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 23, 2021, at 6:52 PM, Jim Walls via EV  wrote:
> 
> On 05/23/2021 18:16, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:
>> Somewhat off topic...
>> 
>> For some time, I've been meaning to get a small UPS to power my router, 
>> laptop, and other electronics in case of an emergency. Well, our power will 
>> be off monday for utility work and so I bought a small UPS. But, I'm 
>> disappointed with it.
> 
> Most small consumer UPSes are good for 15 - 20 at their rated load (when the 
> battery is new).  Yes, that varies A LOT.  Based on your around 100 WH, that 
> would make it about right for a 250 - 300 VA UPS (a quite small one).  Yes, 
> you can usually connect a larger battery, but be a little careful.  Most of 
> these consumer UPSes were not designed to operate in inverter mode for long 
> periods of time.  As a result, they can't handle the heat from an extended 
> run time at anywhere close to rated load.  Same problem on battery recharge - 
> it is going to be asked the charge for a far longer time than expected so 
> again, heat can be an issue.  Heat is generally not that hard to deal with 
> with some forced cooling, but that may or may not totally mitigate the 
> problem.  This computer is being powered by a 1500VA APC UPS that has about 
> 50AH at 24 volts of external battery, but under worst cast, the load is only 
> about 300 watts.
> 
> There are more professional inverters that will happily run forever in invert 
> mode  For example, we are running a bunch of these in a public safety 
> environment at work where they run in invert mode 24x7 essentially forever.  
> These can also run with AC input in either AC preferred or DC preferred.  
> Note, this is just the inverter.  You supply the battery plant (we have 3,600 
> AH at 48 volts in a bunch of places - that's about 5 tons of lead).
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07C3BKZ2F/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01_s00?ie=UTF8=1
> 
> -- 
> 73
> -
> Jim Walls - K6CCC
> j...@k6ccc.org
> Ofc:  818-548-4804
> http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/
> AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org

Re: [EVDL] NEV is a stoopid idea. Moped is better

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Your comment about golf carts in San Francisco surprises me. Unless it has been 
recently changed, state law allows them to be driven on public roads only if 
they are within a short distance (I can’t recall exactly how far - half mile?) 
of a golf course AND the city has adopted an ordinance allowing their operation.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 23, 2021, at 4:24 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> If NEVs are such a "stoopid" idea, why do you see so many smiling people
> 
>> driving golf cars around retirement communities?
> 
> 
>> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
> 
> 
> Because there is no fee in gated communities for golf carts. Large base of 
> used golf carts. 15mph is not a big deal when it's short distances. 
> California Golf Cart & Low Speed Vehicle Laws:
> General Federal Law for Golf Carts:
> 
> Under current NHTSA interpretations and regulations, so long as golf cars and 
> other similar vehicles are incapable of exceeding 20 miles per hour, they are 
> subject to only state and local requirements regarding safety equipment. 
> However, if these vehicles are originally manufactured so that they can go 
> faster than 20 miles per hour, they are treated as motor vehicles under 
> Federal law.
> 
> The standard requires low-speed vehicles (15mph)to be equipped with 
> headlamps, stop lamps, turn signal lamps, tail-lamps, reflex reflectors, 
> parking brakes, rear view mirrors, windshields, seat belts, and vehicle 
> identification numbers. 
> https://golfcartresource.com/california-golf-cart-low-speed-vehicle-laws/  I 
> have seen golf carts driven on San Francisco city streets. Just had a talk 
> with a city official. No license is required for the vehicle but insurance 
> and a drivers license is required in San Francisco. That's why they are 
> smiling.NEV needs full registration just like a car. Mopeds can go 30mph.  
> Lawrence Rhodes 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001694093887.html?albpd=en1005001694093887=708-803-3821_platform=aaf=374448549250=u=9594035441=UneMJZVf=374448549250_id=cf99d56e6e404571826921bcd1e8a857=new_Detail=false=Google_7_shopping=google=en1005001694093887_fcid=f850416029aa46c68b43e3d9374d83be-1621812165465-03567-UneMJZVf=CjwKCAjw-qeFBhAsEiwA2G7Nl_yTO5rjgYKLhGESZnf0hONd8Ohqb0T8jRH71NO88Jm9ih8yA_3YKRoCXwYQAvD_BwE=102695258807_fsk=UneMJZVf=shopping=88=false_trace_key=f850416029aa46c68b43e3d9374d83be-1621812165465-03567-UneMJZVf=c=aw.ds
>  
> 
> 
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org