Re: [EVDL] Adding a FM radio to a Tesla

[Ron via EV]

>From the log:

/runsv
backgammon
root  3825  0.0  0.0   2456   252 ?Ss   Apr15   0:00 runsv
backgammon-input
root  3826  0.0  0.0   2456  1288 ?Ss   Apr15   

Is there really a backgammon game?

If so, does this indicate that it's running as root instead of a more 
restrictive account?

If so, that doesn't sound like a good idea. Speaking of which, if that is 
running as root, it strikes me that there are quite a few things running as 
root that I think probably shouldn't be.

Note that I have no idea how constrained the hardware and operating system are. 
I can imagine embedded systems that don't really have the concept of non-root 
accounts.

On April 18, 2024 9:14:20 a.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
>You can't compare an embedded system designed for industrial use to a
>large-surface GUI on a large OS with a lot of apps.
>
>You probably interact with a handful of systems every day that run linux.
>They all run many layers, and It probably usually isn't the Kernel.   Do
>you have the source for the top layers?  Do you even have a shell, let
>alone root?  Even if you are a developer of your caliber, and somehow had
>source and access, (almost never true) it's simply not feasible to attempt
>to debug someone else's system for some memory leaks that may cause reduced
>performance after weeks of uptime.
>
>Here's the process list on a Tesla Model 3 MCU just to give you an idea of
>what you'd be up against:
>USER   PID %CPU %MEMVSZ   RSS TTY  STAT START   TIME COMMAND
>root 1  0.0  0.0   1060 4 ?Ss   Apr15   0:02 runit
>root 2  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [kthreadd]
>root 6  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[mm_percpu_wq]
>root 7  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   1:36
>[ksoftirqd/0]
>root 8  0.4  0.0  0 0 ?IApr15  14:54
>[rcu_preempt]
>root 9  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?IApr15   3:29 [rcu_sched]
>root10  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?IApr15   0:00 [rcu_bh]
>root11  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:42
>[migration/0]
>root12  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:01
>[watchdog/0]
>root13  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [cpuhp/0]
>root14  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [cpuhp/1]
>root15  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:01
>[watchdog/1]
>root16  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[migration/1]
>root17  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[ksoftirqd/1]
>root19  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[kworker/1:0H]
>root20  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [cpuhp/2]
>root21  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:02
>[watchdog/2]
>root22  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   2:16
>[migration/2]
>root23  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:23
>[ksoftirqd/2]
>root25  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[kworker/2:0H]
>root26  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [cpuhp/3]
>root27  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:01
>[watchdog/3]
>root28  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   2:34
>[migration/3]
>root29  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:21
>[ksoftirqd/3]
>root31  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[kworker/3:0H]
>root32  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [kdevtmpfs]
>root33  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00 [netns]
>root   261  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[oom_reaper]
>root   262  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00 [writeback]
>root   264  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:17
>[kcompactd0]
>root   265  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00 [crypto]
>root   267  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00 [kblockd]
>root   465  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[edac-poller]
>root   471  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00 [watchdogd]
>root   590  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00 [kauditd]
>root   601  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   2:06 [kswapd0]
>root   723  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I07:08   0:01
>[kworker/2:0]
>root   742  0.0  0.0   3272  2528 ?SL   Apr17   0:00
>/bin/minijail0 -T static -l -p -I -v -P /run/chroot/AWE_command_line_tesla
>-K -b/usr /usr -b/lib /lib
>root   751  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?I<   Apr15   0:00
>[acpi_thermal_pm]
>root   765  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[irq/39-mmc0]
>root   768  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[irq/3-mmc1]
>root   771  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?SApr15   0:00
>[irq/120-:00]
>root   773  0.0  0.0  0 0 ?S   

Re: [EVDL] Tesla settles with family

[Ron via EV]

Regarding pedal misapplication, I think you nailed it. I'm a pretty old guy, so 
my driver training might have been different than what is available now.

Driver training #1: my dad was an amateur stock car racer and stunt driver. He 
taught us quite a few neat things. One of the things he taught us was that "No, 
you didn't step on the brake pedal. If the car is accelerating while braking, 
take your foot off and try again. See? This time you hit the right pedal."

Despite his background and skills, he insisted that he was not the right person 
to teach us to drive on streets and highways, so promised to pay for our first 
car if we successfully completed both basic driver training and defensive 
driver training. (BTW, that first car was always a beater that took a fair bit 
of work to make and keep roadworthy!)

#2: During basic driver training we were taught, among other things, that "No, 
you didn't step on the brake pedal. If the car is accelerating while braking, 
take your foot off and try again. See? This time you hit the right pedal."

#3 During defensive driver training, we were taught... well, you get the 
picture.

On April 9, 2024 12:15:00 p.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
>The AP (Auto Pilot) architecture in Tesla's current vehicles is complex,
>but to break it down, there is what Tesla calls the APE (Auto Pilot ECU)
>which has 2 mostly identical processing sections, one as primary and one as
>secondary.  They run identical software and if one fails, the other can
>instantly take over.  They have internal cross-checking in each of them, so
>the "voting" is achieved internally in each unit, and if there is an issue,
>the system will instantly fail over to the other unit.  Also, even when you
>aren't using AP, the system is "shadow driving" and comparing your inputs
>to what it would do, and logging any differences that are periodically
>packaged and sent to Tesla.
>
>The APE is totally separate from the MCU (Multimedia Control Unit), which
>is what you interact with.  It's on a different circuit board, but sharing
>a liquid-cooled housing called the ICE.  The MCU circuit board contains all
>the infotainment stuff which is run by an Intel or AMD CPU and then there's
>a separate Automotive Power-PC processor called the Gateway.  The interface
>to all the other systems in the vehicle is via the Gateway over CAN bus
>(multiple buses).  The Gateway is connected to a 16GB Micro SD card where
>it uses this to continuously log everything happening on the CAN bus.  This
>is totally separate from the other computers, including APE.  Then there is
>the MCU.  It also logs all user control inputs to a separate SQLite3
>database stored in the MCUs filesystem (on eMMC or NVMe depending on
>year).  The APE also has internal logs (so x2).   Then there is the Bosch
>RCM (Restraint Control Module) that runs all the safety systems, and this
>has an EDR (Event Data Recorder) if there are any accidents, and it will
>record those.   Tesla provides a free tool to download your EDR data from
>the Bosch RCM after an accident, but they do not release any other data to
>the public.  In the event of an accident, the RCM will tell the BMS
>(Battery Management System) to blow the pyrotechnic HV fuse in the battery
>to "safe" the HV system, and it also triggers an upload of data from all
>systems to Tesla, including short video clips from all 9 cameras.  This
>data also remains on the various systems and can be extracted without
>Tesla's involvement,  but it's not easy.   I have quite a few interesting
>crash videos I have recovered from salvage Teslas.  Bosch developed the
>RCM, and it's pretty much the same as most other cars, and Tesla did not
>write the software here, nor can they obfuscate any data in the EDR, so
>it's sort of like an "independent verification".
>
>So in the event of a crash, it's pretty easy for Tesla to reconstruct what
>happened, there really is almost zero possibility that there could be a
>"dropout" of all logging on all systems at once.  Tesla has but a lot of
>redundancies in the system.  The various computers have multiple redundant
>power supplies, which are fed from different places in the vehicle, such
>that even is you lopped off one whole side of the car, the systems would
>still get power from the other.  The RCM even has it's own internal power
>reservoir.In addition, all the critical systems in the car, have double
>redundancy, such as the electric steering rack, it has 2 separate
>controllers, each fed with it's own power feed, driving a dual motor, so if
>any one side fails, the other side can keep it going safely until the
>vehicle can be brought to a stop.  Likewise, there are 5 ways braking can
>be achieved under electronic control, (7 if dual-motor).
>
>Sadly, I've seen a lot of Teslas totaled in accidents I can confidently
>surmise are due to pedal misapplication.  (Pressing the accelerator when
>you meant to press the brake.)  I myself have done this on several
>occasions, 

Re: [EVDL] EVLN: How to get a free Tesla

[Ron via EV]

My flipper zero is still en route, so I can't say for sure, but my reading of 
radio specs and capabilities is that anything subject to "attack" by the FZ is 
badly designed or incorrectly implemented.

This is not to say that people don't do questionable things with it, but as a 
long time subscriber to 2600 magazine ("The Hacker Quarterly"), I can tell you 
the vast majority of those things were happening for at least a decade before 
the FZ came on the scene.

On March 8, 2024 3:19:26 p.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
>This is a very low probability vulnerability.  Obviously always be careful
>where you enter credentials.
>
>On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 1:14 PM Robert Johnston via EV 
>wrote:
>
>> It's a common man-in-the-middle attack, and you don't need a Flipper Zero
>> to do it, any PC, laptop, even a cellphone could do the same. See also:
>> Phishing attacks at coffee shops and the like.
>>
>> On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 at 13:57, EV List Lackey via EV 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > The subject line is a bit frivilous, but actually I guess that this is
>> > potentially serious.
>> >
>> > -
>> >
>> > "Security researchers report they uncovered a design flaw that let them
>> > hijack a Tesla using a Flipper Zero, a controversial $169 hacking tool
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Using a Flipper, the researchers set up a WiFi network called 'Tesla
>> > Guest,' the name Tesla uses for its guest networks at service centers ...
>> >
>> > "[The thief] could broadcast the network near a charging station, where a
>> > bored driver might be looking for entertainment. The victim connects to
>> > the
>> > WiFi network and enters their username and password on the fake Tesla
>> > website. The [thief] then uses the credentials to log in to the real
>> Tesla
>> > app, which triggers a two-factor authentication code. The victim enters
>> > that
>> > code into the fake website, and the thief gains access to their account.
>> > Once you´re logged into the Tesla app, you can set up a "phone key" which
>> > lets you unlock and control the car over Bluetooth with a smartphone.
>> From
>> > there, the car is yours."
>> >
>> > Yikes.
>> >
>> > Full story:
>> >
>> > https://jalopnik.com/want-to-steal-a-tesla-try-using-a-flipper-zero-
>> > 1851316625
>> >
>> > Or https://v.gd/FPzvOL
>> >
>> > 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 asked a man in prison once how he happened to be there and
>> >  he said he had stolen a pair of shoes. I told him if he had
>> >  stolen a railroad he would be a United States Senator.
>> >
>> > -- Mary Harris Jones
>> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> > No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Robert "Anaerin" Johnston
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20240308/0f5f199c/attachment.htm
>> >
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>>
>>
>-- 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/
>
-- 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/

Re: [EVDL] Ram truck hybrid

[Ron via EV]

From the snippet you included:

"a pickup that can travel 145 miles (235 kilometers) on electricity"

That's enough that I would use the engine about 15 times a year. Maybe only 2 
or 3 times a year, since most of my destinations have charging available.

I'm torn. Those 2 or 3 times are necessary and rentals aren't available in the 
middle of nowhere. No matter how you slice it, I'd be either buying range I 
rarely use or having an ICE that gets used seldom enough to be it's own worst 
enemy.


--
Ron

On November 7, 2023 10:24:40 a.m. CST, Peri Hartman via EV  
wrote:
>With electric vehicle sales growth slowing, Stellantis Ram brand has an 
>answer: An onboard charger [meaning a hybrid system].
>
>As a purist, as I suspect many EVDL members are, I view this as a setback. 
>However, in general it's probably a good thing because it will mean more 
>truck-miles driven by battery than we would have with strictly pure EV trucks.
>
>https://www.seattletimes.com/business/with-electric-vehicle-sales-growth-slowing-stellantis-ram-brand-has-an-answer-an-onboard-charger/
>
>...
>Stellantis’ Ram brand may have an answer for that, especially for people who 
>need a truck to haul or tow things. It’s called the Ramcharger, a pickup that 
>can travel 145 miles (235 kilometers) on electricity, with a 3.6-liter V6 
>gas-powered engine linked to a generator that can recharge the battery while 
>the truck is moving.
>...
>And when the battery is fully charged and the generator’s 27-gallon 
>(102-liter) gas tank is full, it can go up to 690 miles (1,110 kilometers). 
>The truck also can tow a trailer weighing up to 14,000 pounds.
>...
>The battery also can be charged at home or at a direct-current fast-charging 
>station, where it can take in enough electricity to add 50 miles (80 
>kilometers) of range in about 10 minutes.
>...
>
>--
>
>This article didn't have any mention of pure EV range. Hopefully it's 
>significant enough to make this truck a serious EV.
>
>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/

Re: [EVDL] 'Facts' about EV's debunked

[Ron via EV]

> "there's no 
such thing as society, only men and women,"

If I'm not mistaken, that, or something like it, was said by UK Prime Minister 
c. 1980. That is why anytime I hear people talking about various environmental 
or resource tipping points, I interject with my comment that real tipping point 
was 1980.
--
Ron
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] 'Facts' about EV's debunked

[Ron via EV]

>I am afraid that "not in my lifetime" is one of the reasons we are in this
>mess in the first place...

That is the main reason I switched from trying to convince people to pay 
attention to the problems we're creating to trying to just get people to think 
beyond themselves and beyond what they can imagine for their immediate future. 
We can't fix or prevent any major problem as long as we're a bunch of selfish 
assholes.
--
Ron
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] 'Facts' about EV's debunked

[Ron via EV]

As a Canadian, I can tell you that buying land in Canada ain't gonna cut it. In 
relation to the size of our country, the bulk our currently arable land is 
shockingly close to the US border and is rapidly looking to teeter on the edge 
of viability.

Go a bit farther north and you run into something called the Canadian Shield: 
rock, rock, and more rock, with swamp in the lowlands, lakes in the holes, and 
trees hanging on for dear life where it's shocking that anything other than 
lichen can exist. 

North of that is tundra. It was once viable, arable land. Before the last ice 
age. As fast as we're heating the planet, that tundra will still not be useful 
for food production until centuries after the current farmland is useless for 
agriculture as we know it.

The only real option is to fix what we've got before it's irrevocably broken.
--
Ron

On October 29, 2023 5:48:29 p.m. CST, Michael Ross via EV  
wrote:
>Just because the effort to electrify is not going to be completely
>successful doesn't mean I don't want it done. Buying land in Canada might
>be a reasonable response compared to trying to green up the whole world.
>Going electric world wide will take perhaps 4 times the production of
>copper that the earth sustains at this time. It is there, but I don't see
>humans getting it together to do it.
>
>There are all sorts of other elementary inputs that we do not
>currently produce at quantities and rates anything near what it will take
>to green up enough to make a difference. It is a bad pickle but it is what
>it is.
>
>One mitigating factor is the demographics of the world's population - it
>has the population shrinking very significant amounts in the next half
>century.
>
>On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 11:17 PM Michael Ross 
>wrote:
>
>> Considering the needs to maintain the manufacturing of the past decade,
>> Europe has essentially none. Germany is burning lignite, for example.
>> France has nukes to hold them together. That is about it. Norway? They
>> would rather not use petroleum, and make the right moves to avoid it. Norge
>> can't support the rest of the continent.
>>
>> We have shale tech and I have read there is more than 50 years worth that
>> we know about. Yeah, unlimited is hyperbolic, but there is no limit in my
>> lifetime.
>>
>> There isn't enough copper (and so on) to electrify what uses petrol now,
>> not in my lifetime. The greatest suppliers we
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Ron via EV]

Just spitballing here...

What about VIN equivalents in the adapter itself or manufacturers building 
their charge ports and in-vehicle networking to Tesla specs?

All of this stuff is well over my head, but having written Palm Pilot programs 
that interface with mainframe systems, it strikes me that there are usually 
ways to effectively and reliably extend systems without breaking them.

But, as I said, all of this is well over my head. :)
--
Ron

On June 21, 2023 11:23:40 a.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
>No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
>supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
>no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
>would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
>service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
>carries a 10 year sentence.
>
>On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
>wrote:
>
>> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
>> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
>> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
>> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
>> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
>> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
>>
>> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
>> > The broken record continues:
>> >
>> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
>> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
>> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
>> >
>> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
>> >
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> > <
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] opinion: smaller evs ?

[Ron via EV]

The width was one of my thoughts, too. I know of a couple of urban bridges 
where the "bike lane" is actually a single shared sidewalk. It's been several 
years since I lived there and used those routes, but as I recall it required 
care for two standard wheelchairs or mobility scooters to get past each other 
when they met partway across. I've since wondered how some of those adult 
upright tricycles and the newer recumbent trikes fare.

I can only imagine that anything with an outer shell would be even more 
challenging. Even if narrow enough, it might still require sticking your head 
out a window to get a good sight line to ensure clearance.
--
Ron

On September 9, 2022 9:40:59 p.m. CST, Peri Hartman via EV  
wrote:
>I'll speak up here, as an avid urban bike rider.
>
>Already bike lanes are used by multiple kinds of vehicles: bikes, of course, 
>but also e-bikes, electric scooters, hover boards, segways, skate boards, and 
>just about any personal mobility device you can imagine.
>
>So, the question isn't really whether bike riders would comfortably share bike 
>paths with various electric vehicles. I think two factors are important
>1. speed
>2. size
>
>On speed, in Seattle, e-bikes are limited to 20mph (you can go faster, but not 
>with assist). That's amply fast and, so far, seems to be ok. My personal 
>opinion is that other forms of EVs could use bike paths if they are limited to 
>20 mph. But that only works if the density is low. Imagine if you have a child 
>riding, who hasn't yet developed good situational awareness. A moderately 
>heavy object at 20 mph is enough to kill the child. So, I don't really have a 
>good answer on speed.
>
>On size, it gets more argumentative. Bikes are relatively narrow, and can pass 
>or be passed without too much extra space. Same for scooters, skate boards, 
>etc. If we get small, enclosed EVs that are 3-4' wide they may literally fit 
>in a bike lane but completely hog it. I can see that being strongly looked 
>down on. On the other hand, if someone were to design a wind and weather shell 
>which was no wider than the handle bars of a road bike, it might be ok.
>
>And, like for any subject, there are as many opinions as people. I don't know 
>how others would react. All I know is that the current sharing situation seems 
>to be ok with most people.
>
>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/

Re: [EVDL] EV charging v crypto mining

[Ron via EV]

I rarely have much to contribute here, so I hope I got the reply addressing 
correct and hope I'm not straying too far afield.

I'm a retired programmer. In 2010, I started looking into Bitcoin. I don't want 
to plug things up with my reasons or conclusions, but one of the things I 
looked at was power consumption.

My back of the envelope calculations showed that power was going to be the 
limiting factor for "mining." I also concluded that this would remain true 
regardless of hardware developments or even the introduction of custom hardware.

I don't imagine I was the first to conclude that anyone more serious than a 
"curiosity tinkerer" like me should be living where there is such thing as a 
real winter and limit mining to the heating season. Sure enough, there were 
soon people bragging about producing enough "waste heat" to meet their 
household heating needs.

As always, lunch is not only never free, but costs more than you ever imagined.
--
Ron

On July 19, 2022 1:22:26 a.m. CST, Steves via EV  wrote:
>Thanks for doing a sanity check on the numbers. I was surprised at how hard it 
>was to find good numbers on total kWh for charging and crypto mining. Not that 
>I spent a lot of time on it, but still. When I first searched I found some 
>numbers that needed a bit of juggling, and the results seemed incredibly wrong 
>so I dropped it. I thought about it again yesterday and modified my search and 
>found the quote I sent. It was similar to my other estimate, so I figured it 
>must be reasonably correct. 
>
>My understanding is that for crypto like bitcoin, that it gets harder to mine 
>future ‘coins’ so it will just get worse.
>
>I’m somewhat agnostic on crypto - Freakonomics has a good series on it- but 
>the energy use is appalling. 
>
>In any case, and to stay on topic, it’s a good comparison to bring up next 
>time someone argues that EV charging will bring down the grid.
>
>-Steve
>
>> On Jul 19, 2022, at 12:58 AM, EV List Lackey via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> On 18 Jul 2022 at 22:56, Steves via EV wrote:
>> 
>>> With only 2 million EVs on the road, EVs would consume approximately 7.9
>>> billion kWh annually or less than 1% of the US electric production of 3,980
>>> billion kWh. That seems relatively small in comparison to data centers
>>> consuming roughly 73 billion kWh or crypto-mining including Bitcoin at 91
>>> billion kWh.
>> 
>> That's interesting (and appalling) information.  
>> 
>> I've read some astronomical worldwide amount for cryptocurrencies, and just 
>> checked. It's 110 terawatt hours per year, *just for Bitcoin*.  That's about 
>> as much as the entire country of Sweden uses.  
>> 
>> Not to offend anybody here who's into such things, but I for one welcome 
>> declines in value for crytocurrencies.  It reduces the energy use and carbon 
>> release, which is of benefit to us all.  It also might eventually make it 
>> possible to buy a reasonably-priced high performance computer graphics card 
>> again, not that I've ever needed such a critter.
>> 
>> Sources differ, but I see 2021 US EV sales numbers ranging from 471,000 to 
>> 608,000.  One source says that as of 2020, 1.4 million EVs had been sold 
>> here.  So it looks like your 2 million figure is about right for the moment.
>> 
>> I used 15,000 miles per year and 350 wh/mi to get a typical EV use of 5250 
>> kwh each per year.  Two million EVs of that type would use 10,500,000,000 
>> kwh (10.5 billion) - more than the figure you quote, but within shouting 
>> distance.
>> 
>> So we could add 700% more EVs to the US vehicle mix and STILL be using less 
>> electricity for them than cryptocurrency "mining" uses in this country 
>> alone.
>> 
>> Something to think about.
>> 
>> One thing to consider is that EV charging tends to pool in the overnight 
>> hours, so that concentrates the load in those hours.  However, that also 
>> happens to be when aircon and business loads are lower.
>> 
>> I'm a long way from an engineering or power generation expert, but I don't 
>> see a problem, unless the person firehosing the statistics is an oilhead 
>> dedicated to sowing FUD to keep their profits rolling in - or a politician 
>> pandering to reactionary anti-EV yahoos.
>> 
>> 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
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
>> Where they burn books, they will eventually burn people.
>> 
>>   -- Heinrich Heine
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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 

Re: [EVDL] Lightning

[Ron via EV]

I had a deposit on one. I got a phone call in January from the dealer to get 
the process started, but by then my wife and I had decided that it was more 
important for me to retire than to buy a vehicle. As I recall the price on 
offer from Jubilee Ford in Saskatoon was in line with MSRP.

Saskatchewan has no tax credit, but even if we had one that matched the federal 
one ($7500, I think), we still couldn't have afforded it without me putting off 
retirement for a few years. It was just never meant to be :)
--
Ron

On April 13, 2022 10:40:19 p.m. CST, Jim Walls via EV  wrote:
>Just wondering.  Anyone on the list either have or have considered the 
>Ford Lighting pickup?
>
>-- 
>73
>-
>Jim Walls - K6CCC
>j...@k6ccc.org
>Ofc:  818-548-4804
>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] EVLN: Sticking to the stink

[Ron via EV]

As someone who fondly remembers all the time spent with my father flying model 
airplanes and racing cars and motorcycles, I admit to a certain sentimentality 
associated with loud engines and the smell of nitromethane. But I am more than 
happy to create new memories as I leave those things in the past where they 
belong.
--
Ron

On July 19, 2021 3:36:37 p.m. CST, EVDL Administrator via EV 
 wrote:
>"Ford made a premium gas fragrance for EV owners who miss the smell of 
>fossil fuels"
>
>https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/16/22580508/ford-gas-perfume-premium-mach-
>eau
>
>or https://v.gd/JkwfOE
>
>Apparently this is a thing.  Just today, hours before reading this, I
>was 
>chatting with a young sales person in a hardware store.  She was
>perhaps in 
>her mid-20s.  We talked about the store's electric mowers and then
>somehow 
>got onto EVs.  She said that the new EVs were OK, even interesting, but
>that 
>she'd never buy one.  Why not?  Because she'd miss the noise and the
>stink 
>of ICEs.  I guess she was serious.  She even specifically mentioned the
>
>stench of unburned hydrocarbons. 
>
>It's a strange addiction, entirely beyond my ken, but there you have
>it.
>
>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
>
>= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> Talking about the contents of this poster is illegal.  
> It is important that you share this information with 
> colleagues and neighbors, and discuss it with your 
> family.  Failure to do so may lead to prosecution.  
> For more information please reread.
>
>   -- Scarfolk Council poster
>= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
>
>___
>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