@@Patrick94GSR actually it's the same. What happens when you lose power? As a Floridian we stock up on gas during hurricane season. Try doing that with batteries 😂
@@ckilgore3983 Once-a-century weather conditions are NOT the same as a balanced power plan, which Texas does not have. The cannot import energy in any significant quantity when they have a shortage. Blame the politicians, not renewable power.
The sums are not very hard, and he did the research and worked out the answers beforehand. Anyone properly numerate can do this, given the presentation practice someone like Jason has had. (Without that practice it'll have an awful lot of 'erm's in it and be noticeably less clear).
@@motorpsykler thats a good point... notice that he drives down a winding rural road, and he does not drive on urban streets with many intersections, road signs , traffic, etc etc so in the place of where other people might put a GPS, he could have a tablet with a teleprompter scrolling the script for him
As a norwegian I find your examples from Norway interesting. As you say, yes we can handle it today, but just barely at times. This past month it has been very cold, and prices for kwh has gone through the roof. Energy companies have trouble coping with the peaks and tells EV owners to charge at night. However,...the politicians have got electricity on their brains, and EVERYthing shall be electric in the not so distant future. Boats, ferries, lorrys, buses, excavators, chain saws, tractors, motor bikes, and within 2040 all domestic aviation shall be electric if dreamers are right. Will the grid struggle then?? Oh yes...
And still with over 50% of new car sales -- EV cars in Norway are only ~~6%~8% of all vehicles (and probably top of the share from country fleet worldwide) There are 2.8 milion registered passanger cars and overall 5.6 milion of vehicles registered (including trucks, tractors, bikes, mopeds, snow scooters, buses etc.) --- and even with 54% of all new vehicle sales that's only about ~~100 thousand new EV every year. So it would take about 20 years to change only half of cars in Norway to electric. In 2020 there was only (with the high market share in new cars over 50% in new car sales) 346,921 battery cars and 142,858 hybrid vehicles (plug in) -- this is only half a milion of ev + plug in hybrids from 5.6 vehicles overall (so that gives 6% of all cars are BEV or 8,7% are BEV or hybrid), that is a large number of EV cars but not so impressive compared to number of cars overall. Norway also produces very clean energy due to nature (97% of country elecricity comes from hydroplants/waterdams) - not every country has that. So it makes more sense to switch. But there is also very cold for a few months winter and you have to plug in the car for the night to keep battery warm or have it stored in a warm garage. (EV left for more than 24h in -20 Celcius = lost guarantee on battery pack (Tesla?)?) So they taxed ICE cars to be more expensive than EV (normal Golf did cost more than EV Golf years ago)- this is half of the success but the switch is happening not because people wanted ev's or they were cheaper but due to tax reasons :) Still a nice experiment to see. Hope that won't end like every other socialistic experiment :P
“Will the grid struggle then?” - probably _not,_ because in Norway we have it stupidly easy to get at much more electric energy: by further expanding the hydropower capacity, and wind could provide the same amount again - at least if it weren't for the fact that most regions don't want to have the turbines in their nature. I would agree however that most _other_ countries would indeed struggle to get to a comparable level of electrification, short of building lots of new nuclear plants.
@@leftaroundabout Nope. You shouldn't have problems - that's why EVs in Norway make more sense. As at night the usage is probably minimal, and you don't have to use AC in your home at summer (if at all) that much due to climate. What is the main heat source for homes ? Natural gas or wood or something else ?
I agree about your AC comparison. But... Here in California, mid summer CA's infrastructure cannot keep up with AC use alone. Hence our annual rolling black outs
lot easier to shift demand for charging to an off-peak period than cooling. also what annual rolling blackout? fake news made a big deal out of this summer's worst ever heatwave but they avoided blackouts with one simple trick: a text message. lol. big brain texas collapsed with a little bit of snow.
@@ericdahl696 Where I live, which is in a desert, in summer the normal high is greater than 100F and the normal low is greater than 80F. Therefore the air conditioning runs 24 hours per day. However, I have a split unit in the master bedroom so I can keep it cool enough and let the rest of the house stay a bit warmer. That at least saves some energy. During winter the system acts as a heat pump. Because the low temperature during winter is rarely lower then 40F, air source heat pumps work quite well.
I remember living in Los Angeles 8 years ago when a heat wave hit and literally street lights, billboards and traffic lights were constantly being shut down so that the grid could make it. No one even owned an EV back then and people drove around in cars to cool off.
The electrical code only allows a certain amount of load to be on certain sizes of conductors, transformers, breakers, etc. Increasing load would require major upgrades to electrical infrastructure which takes years and a lot of money. You can't just put a constant 1800VA load on each house in the neighborhood and hope the pole transformer fuse won't blow.
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes. DOUBLE the power plants capacity. DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines. But with ALL transportation electric, then say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS, TRIPLE poles and wires, TRIPLE main grid. Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. And For the long trip. The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority. The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV. The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour. The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money. Every building is connected to the grid. Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid. Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies. Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply. Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm. Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH . Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm. For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades. And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years. Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required. Insurance will not be available. If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min, The USA is the biggest target in the world. Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter. Military costs increase massively and national budgets. ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs. 75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades. Think, think, think 🤔 ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , and just live in a fantasy.
Utility fusing doesn’t fallow electrical “safety“ code…they are normally fused at 200-300% more than what consumers fusing requires..Utility fusing is designed to protect the supply of power not the hardware.If a single piece of equipment fails and hydro for the rest of the grid is still energized it’s working perfectly.
Utility electrical engineer here: You missed a huge category - lack of transmission infrastructure. We lack the long distance transmission line capacity to move power from where renewable energy is being produced, to the cities where it will be used. So we can have enough generation, and the local grid can have the capacity to handle the peak load, but there may be no way to get the power from the point of generation to the point of consumption due to lack of capacity on the bulk electric system (BES).
Bingo, perhaps this dreamer needs to go back to the drawing board. It's OK he graduated from the same University Joe O'biden failed economics and you see where that got us. We don't need electric cars and loose our freedom. Think of allowing the government to further dictate us like the gas shortage and baby food shortage. The stupidity has to stop. So go get a job...
Need to build out a network of HVDC lines. These are more immune to solar flares, EMP etc. There's a few in operation already to move power from up north in Canada down to southern California. Lookup Pacific DC Intertie. Another good thing about HVDC is it doesn't depend on the grid frequency to remain in sync, if the system frequency starts getting unstable, it can start a widespread cascading blackout like in the northeast in 2003. By using DC for interstate transmission it would help to isolate these type of incidents to prevent the entire grid section from collapsing.
@@brnmcc01 It’s the age old problem of trying to move DC vs moving AC. Transmission loss is a real problem. I agree the lack of transmission capacity is part of the problem. But the biggest problem in the Grid is the ability to at will increase output when demand spikes. Increased demand is what causes black and brown outs.
In 2015, we started installing Mr. Fusion home kits along with 1.21 GW flux capacitors. If they haven't made it to your neighborhood yet, be on the look out for a guy named Marty.
If I have a really difficult problem on my mind, I'll often do the same thing while driving my otherwise empty car. What I find amazing is that he doesn't take momentary pauses when something on the road demands his attention.
@@jensageholm8774 I see what I did. Thought he was just averaging the increase. On a 40 year basis for the five-fold increase, it's 4.11% annual increase. So, closer to 6.51 years to increase our production by 30% at that rate. Thanks for the correction.
Love your back of the envelope calculations. I got my electrical engineering degree in 1970 and worked for an electric utility for 30 years. I then spent another 15 years working as a consultant to electric utilities, my specialty was remote monitoring and control. While I would be the last to say this problem "is beyond the capability or the American engineer," I would like to point out some issues which you either neglected or glossed over too lightly. I think the key is we have to begin today to solve this problem. Because the electric utility industry is so capital intensive, the old system of public utility regulation, allowed the utility to plan five ten or even 20 years into the future and and make a reasonable profit on that investment. Today we are leaving generation and and a lot of transmission investment to the non-regulated segment which is not promised a reasonable return on their investments. Solar, wind, geothermal and other renewables are great, but some additional base-load is needed too. In the 60's, 70's and 80's many utilities built "fat" into their systems. This "fat" (allowed for the planning for reasonable contingencies) served several purposes. A flatter demand curve is not necessarily always a good thing for the grid. Starting in the 90's that "fat" was sacrificed in the name of cheaper rates. Automation on the distribution side has helped with not having the "fat." Those off-peak hours are important for maintenance (and construction.) I don't know, not my area, but I would look at what running a transformer at a higher load for more hours a day is going to do to the life of that transformer. Utilities are going to need engineers to design, build and operate system additions. Last time I checked we were not turning out new engineers at a good rate and new engineers were not knocking down the doors of electric utilities. I have been completely retired for over five years now, and I am still getting calls wanting me to come back to work because they can't find people. One final point, Norway's scaling problem is not quite the same. I think the absolute numbers, not just the ratios or percentages, do make a difference too. I will close by saying, that you are right, it can be done. And I say it must be done. I just think there is a little more to it.
@@CountryCraziness there is a lot of anti nuclear power people out there. They seem to believe wind and solar can do it all. Nuclear power is a viable option when the wind isn't blowing and sun aren't shining. I believe MIT is close to getting a nuclear fusion to becoming a reality.
Agreed, a higher average load will affect life of components so new components will need to be re-designed to higher standards. The great news is we do have some time and it will slowly work itself out. It will take a couple decades to scale battery production to the extent that 100% new vehicles are EVs, so even doubling his calculation of 6.5 years to 13 years will be fine. Home and Grid batteries will help equalize the load and will be cheaper than peaker plant construction/running costs and major plant long term maintenance. They will also react quicker and be smarter in distribution.
In my neighborhood each pad mount transformer feeds four houses. The transformer cannot handle an additional 8 Type II chargers. It's OK if one person gets an electric car. A lot has to be figured out before we can all adopt the new tech. You can't just "pass a law".
@@flagmichael politicians are playing to peoples emotions… they act like the only reason way things are is because the people of won’t let me. “But when I get in power, I will change these arbitrary rules. “
@@pleasedontwatchthese9593 Charging cars make whatever time they are charging peak hours. THis idea of just charge them at night is not well thought out.
Love your videos, and I'm not against evs. However, your second argument about the local grid and residential charging states that it is based on one vehicle per household. I don't know the number, but I bet the average American household has at least 2 vehicles. So wouldn't this multiply your calculations by at least 200%? Also, it would be nice to hear the avg cost per KWh, ang how much it would cost people to charge 2 or 3 cars. Finally, having experience in nuclear power generation, I think a lot of your assumptions may be a little off. energy production has indeed increased since 1960, but the transmission grid have seen very.little upgrades and is showing it's age. That infrastructure would def need to be upgraded.
Cars per household is important, but not so much. What matters is the number of cars existing. As for charging while home, I don't see it as much as a problem. Your point is a bit like saying "what if I drive my 2 cars to a gas station ? wouldn't it be more difficult to refuel ?" --> YEs of course, but why would you do that ? you can decide when to charge (EV) your car. IF it really creates a problem. I don't know about USA but in Europe we have elecriticy contracts that have different costs depending on the charging hour (example: you pay 5 times less if you charge at night). Those contracts will evolve depending on the grid and demands. So you can always adapt. It's not black and white of course: if you're working all day, you need to charge your car at night. IF it needs charging (with a higher autonomy, you can wait, and maybe charge it during the weekend at day light for example). There is a lot of moving parts. Point is electricity is NOT fuel. => if ALL EV charge at the same time, it IS an issue. But that wont' happen. If they charge at different time, the weight on the grid is way less. For Fuel, it is different.
What does the gridd have anything to do with it. Just build some overunity homopolar motor generator n-machine(Bruce Depalma). or a T Henry Moray plasma machine Edwin grey pulsed discharge 2 stroke powered motor. there are many more but all tap the aetheric vacuum ZPE energy wich has 10^94 grams/cc electromagnetic energy density. Moray B Kings books descibes all this and Tom bearden is well versed in ZPE energy.All these A ZPE powered electromagnetic sytems will give much more energy and HP then what were led to belief. I dont see what the obsession of a grid for all this stuff.
Great idea… make US 100% dependent upon EVs…. Don’t improve our grid capabilities/capacities, AND do nothing to improve our grids ability to resist cyber/EMP/solar flare/mechanical attacks… what does this do? Very minimally affects anything in a positive way AND makes us even more vulnerable to throw us back to the Middle Ages when the elites truly ruled the peasants…. Not to mention more dependency on questionable foreign powers for things like the batteries necessary to carry out this plan….Nice, we’ll thought-out plan…if that is your idea of a good idea…. When someone sits down and actually contemplates ALL of the issues EVs really have to overcome, the answer is: By all means, continue the research on improving ALL technologies we use for energy (both current AND those that are on the drawing board) fix the weaknesses of the grid, and gradually move toward the newer/better energy/technologies as they become truly feasible…. And before you use the flamethrower on my post here, please consider the environmental impact that its use will have on climate change…😬😬😬
fwiw, here's my math. admittedly an extreme example. but it is my situation. Oklahoma resident. Presently we average ~30miles/day. our most used vehicle is a 2001 V8 Sequoia. 12.6mpg city/16.3mpg hwy. Let's call it 14mpg average. Right this instant we pay ~$3.3/gal for regular. So... (30days) * (30 miles/day) / (14mpg) * (3.30 $/gal) = $212.14 per month. A Model Y get's ~3.1 mi/kWh. (way easier units than the 111-129 MPGe). Variable rate EV plans in my area are $0.197/kWh peak hours and $0.026/kWh 11pm to 6am. Soo... if I could successfully only trickle charge from 11pm to 6am then: (30days) * (30 miles/day) / (3.1 mi/kWh) * (0.026 $/kWh) = $7.55 per month. edit, 3mos later: in the Oklahoma heat and our driving style we get like 2.9 to 3.3 mi/kWh. not the 3.5 originally stated.
Appreciate the info, you're a good explainer. As a California resident, I fear the day that CA mandates EVs for everyone here, because we are closing plants and importing power already, and rates are only climbing. Not to mention the "aging infrastructure" and the problems caused by that, other than the spectacular seasonal wildfires. CA energy demand is currently "unsustainable" but rather than build more base line power plants, they are increasing the power they buy from other states. As for "predictable" solutions, the only things in CA that is predictable, are vast cost overruns, corruption and delays.
As Californians. To solve a lot of our problems we need to do one simple thing. ... take Gavin Newsom and put him on the moon far far away. He is a socialist corrupt scumbag. He must go soon
We are in a similar situation in Portugal, without any baseline sources like Nuclear, only Natural Gas as a dispatchable, and increasing reliance on the intermittent RES and on Imported energy from the rest of Europe.... Just like California...More info in my comment above
Great video. Thanks for creating this. One big difference between 1960-2000 compared to today is the “war” on coal and nuclear. It was much easier to build either type of powerplant in 1960 or even 1980 than it is today. Michigan has closed at least 15 coal plants since 2015 and on track to close 10 more by 2025. Plus we just idled a nuclear plant. We’re losing lots of capacity and not replacing it.
Michigan should go hard into nuclear and hydro power production, and with all the people out there cutting out their production and not building new power sources, Michigan should take advantage of the situation while ensuring our own stability. Use the state's official powers to safely streamline and highly cost-effectively install many new high-capacity plants.
@@cobaltclass. Michigan is flat. How are they going to get hydro power. You need mountains at least the size of the Ozarks to build resovoirs. But then you're flooding entire towns and hundreds of square miles. Imagine the environmental impact. To save the planet we'll destroy the environment.
@@cobaltclass. Hydro is great but they are tearing down dams because of the environmental harm they are doing! Nobody wants nuclear in their backyards even though they are very safe.
@@cobaltclass. So where would put a dam on the The Detroit river? Somewhere on the St Clair river? You do realize ocean going ships also use the Duluth / Atlantic route along the St Lawrence Seaway? When I approached a flock of No nukes, No guns, numb breasted, the air is being poisoned all that, hens with this. The decisions you make today will decide whether your grandchildren and great grandchildren will A. Glow in the dark. B. Starve to death. C. Freeze to death. You would have thought they all just laid eggs. That was in 1975. Having college level education in electricity, electronics, mechanical engineering, chemistry and biosciences sucks. As for Norway it is as about as big as New Mexico. 2.5 million people live in New Mexico. 5 million live in Norway. Norway has around 50 hydro power stations. Just guessing about 50% generate more than or equal to 250 Mega watts. Michigan I think has one or two 30 Megawatt hydro stations. The rest are smaller and most are in the UP.
"No problem, we just need 30% more power" would be much more convincing if California and New York were not having trouble serving their current needs.
Your calculations left out an obvious factor: most families here in Florida have a minimum of 2 cars and run A/C round the clock about 75-80% of the year. I presume Arizona, Texas, California and parts of other states do the same. Therefore your estimate of per household usage of energy needs to be doubled plus. Also, you did not address the issues of EV trucking, railroad, busses, and taxi's. I have yet to hear how transcontinental flight, much less international flight is going to work as all electric! So far I've only seen one ultra-light aircraft powered by batteries. It could carry only the pilot, and had a range of 2 hours. Do you propose returning to sailing ships for international travel?
It hurts TX too in that a lot of "new arrivals" are from CA & NY, thus putting more of a burden on an already overwhelmed system. The result will be Disaster yet again. The cold weather "occasions" are occurring with more frequency seemingly. Does anybody have TX weather data proving Brutal cold snaps are happening more frequently?
I live in North Carolina and we now have two EVs. We only charge between 1 AM and 6 AM during the discount period which is around 6 cents per kWH. This is also a very low demand period for electricity so I doubt if we are hardly noticeable in the grand scheme of things. It definitely hasn't been very noticeable in our monthly bill and we're saving a ton vs the gasoline we used to buy every month. Also we only need to charge two to three times per week for each vehicle because our daily commutes are not that far. If we were the average household scenario, would it really be 30% more needed or is this worse case that you are talking? Another factor (although I'm not sure how big), if we didn't have to pump, refine or manufacture as much petroleum, wouldn't this be a sizable return back to the grid since it does require electricity?
Great video. I have discussed this roughly. Living in Los Angeles we see when there is an unusual heat wave in the summer and everyone is using air conditioners, it often overloads the whole grid system, then try to imagine all those same people plugging in their car while the air conditioner is on. It will definitely be a big and expensive up grade to make electric cars feasible. I'm a retired electrician and I just connected a 40 amp circuit for some one in my apartment building for a car charger. There is definitely not enough electricity in this building for even half the tenants to have EVs.
Pretty simple solution. Get solar plus battery backup. In tesla's configurator, my 2000 sq ft house would cost $12,000 after incentives which with $150 power bill pays for itself in 7 years. I'm not sure why more people don't do this but in a few years it will get even cheaper maybe even below 5 years payback period.
We need to find a way to cool our homes cheaper as well as heat our homes cheaper. We have increased the use of insulation. How ever we need air exchange
We installed an EV charging circuit controlled by the power company. The circuit relay is only on from 10pm - 7am, but the rate is only 3c/KwH. Costs just under $2 to fully charge the Bolt.
That is pretty amazing actually and a good solution for the time being. Thanks for sharing that. My local electric co-op offers me 250kwhs monthly of free electricity upon proof of owning an electric vehicle. As long as you charge it between 11pm-7am.
Just did the same here in tampa to take advantage of time of use, we are getting 6c/kwh. In my model 3, thats close to 1.5c/mile. My girlfriends Civic, for example, at 35mpg and $2.50 in gas per gallon nearly 5x that cost (7.2c/mile in fuel). Even compared to a cheap, good mileage car I'm saving over $1,100 per year in fuel alone.
@@peted3637 Wow, that's a lot. I know everything in AUS is generally more expensive, but dang. Our normal rate is 10.5c, which is still only ~$7 to fully recharge. My Camry costs ~$18 to go that same distance. At 30k mi/yr that really adds up.
@@andrewt9204 It's 11c per kWh here in Colorado. It's a flat rate though so no benefits or costs to charging whenever I need to. My Bolt's about 3c per mile and my old Subaru was about 10c per mile.
I'm in Ontario Canada. We already have peak and off-peak hydro charges. It's a nightmare. 5X the charge for on peak times...You know when you want to use it....Or stay up late just to save some money. If the answer is to further capitalize energy, than we're all going to pay much more than we think. Keep the great vids coming. Stay Happy an Healthy.
My EV the Chevy Bolt, which is cheap and crappy (although efficient) is programmable for charging for different rates. I'm sure other cars have this and more. So, no need to stay up late, just plug your car in and tell it tostart charging when rates go down and it will all be ok.
@@catinthehat5140 I don't have a machine to change laundry, cook things on my electric stove, etc. It's the domestic tasks that you can save $ with. Microwave, electric stove and dryer can use lot of energy. That's one of the reasons why there's a spike in usage around dinner time. Stay Happy and Healthy.
5x cheap is still cheap. In California we have expensive and 2.5 x expensive power. We have hydro but you have to carry the water back up the hill in buckets to maintain flow. And those people are well paid, They use donkeys. Cheaters.
Bit of a slight-of-hand going on with the rate of electricity increase calculations here. From 1960 to 2000, we went from generating (relatively) small amounts of electricity to generating huge amounts of electricity. Since you're starting with a small number, the percent increase is going to be large as a matter of course. But, now that we're starting with a large number, subsequent percent increases only come from massive absolute increases. By analogy, if I do one pushup on day one and 10 on day two, I've increased the number I've done by 1000%. However, if I did 20 push-ups on day 3, I would only have increased my total by 100%..
There are also a lot of variables like how was the grid built for and how much upgrades have been done. For all we know, the electrical system may have been placed for a certain maximum of electrical use and hasn’t reached yet. You can only transport so much electricity at once, so even if there is enough electric to go around, can the grid move it around fast enough to everyone so here are no disruptions?
Hey man, you are a great teacher bro. Out of all the Engineering channels out there, you seem to be able to explain it in ways that are more understandable. It is very appreciated and I am glad you have been more active lately
@@BubblesTheCat1 The willingness to share his knowledge speaks volumes about his character...His compensation will be far greater than any amount of $$$ in the end...💯
I just found this channel and subscribed immediately. Not because of the solid content, or the solid data, or even the fact he was able to bust out math equations on the top of his head. But because of all of the above and he was able to do it so casually while going for a Sunday drive without batting an eye lid or missing a word.
Yes, same thoughts, I figured there is no way he has a prompter here, he is a very intelligent young guy rattling all this stuff out of his head while doing a nice country drive, and makes very interesting points also.
I have driven this exact drive 100’s of times in my EV’s and 🏍 motorcycles. I was on the Board of the OEVA Oregon Electric Vehicle 🚗 Association and remember this EV enthusiast from then. Our conversations were on this topic to the point we could all share the numbers by memorization
I have driven this exact drive 100’s of times in my EV’s and 🏍 motorcycles. I was on the Board of the OEVA Oregon Electric Vehicle 🚗 Association and remember this EV enthusiast from then. Our conversations were on this topic to the point we could all share the numbers by memorization
I'm curious to know how that energy will be generated. From the 1960s to 2000s no one was thinking about climate change, so nothing was stopping the country from using coal or natural gas, which is a fairly easy addition, especially in comparison with renewables. Now, though, the addition would have to be in clean energy, and adding to that there will be pressure to retire some 90% of non-renewable energy currently at work in the US. In other words, I think we need something serious in terms of a technological breakthrough to aid this transition.
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes. DOUBLE the power plants capacity. DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines. But all transportation electric, say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS, TRIPLE poles and wires, TRIPLE main grid. Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. For the long trip. The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority. The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV. The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour. The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money. Every building is connected to the grid. Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid. Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies. Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply. Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm. Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH . Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm. For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades. And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years. Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required. Insurance will not be available. If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min, The USA is the biggest target in the world. Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter. Military costs increase massively and national budgets. ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs. 75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades. Think, think, think 🤔 ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , and just live in a fantasy.
In Sweden where it´s pretty cold at the moment, goverment has actually told us to not run the vacuum cleaner and other power hungry stuff. In the same time they decommisionned a nuclear power plant. Aaaand they use heavy tax on ICE cars to make us buy electric cars. It´s a bit worrying.
Some problems with your analysis: 1. Not only do we need to increase the amount of power we produce by (your estimate) 30%, we also have to replace most of the power plants we have now with green power plants if EVs are to fulfill their purpose. (The problem will be substantially higher in some regions.) So we need to essentially rebuild the entire power generating infrastructure in the USA if we are going to address the green house emissions and so far that isn't in the plans. 2. You're assuming every household has only one electric vehicle. Most families will have two, just as most households have two gas-powered cars. This will double your estimate as to the amount of power being drawn from each household. 3. As you say, power grids are already forced into blackouts during peak times in the summer due to air conditioner because we don't have to power generating capacity to deal with the demand we currently have. Flattening the curve will help. But we will still need major investments to upgrade the grid to have a aggregate load that will be nearly twice the current load. 4. How long will it take for growing population to push the grid beyond its limits when we all adopt EVs and flatten the load? Then at some point the burgeoning population will cause the grid to be above its limits most of the time. Again, we will need substantial investments to avoid the problem. 5. You mention power charging issues for apartment complexes and so on, and those aren't trivial to solve. Again, the costs of getting the power stations to plus the long charging times can't be glossed over. The costs of the new and replacement power sources and the grid upgrades must be put into the plan or consumer sticker shock will cause a revolt against the technology.
Thank you for addressing this! Every time I talk about electric cars, the grid is one of the first things people want to talk about. I'll be sharing this video a lot haha. Loved the air conditioning example too!
If you watched the video he goes into the adoption rates and off setting peak charging loads to balance the grid. This is not an unpredictable/insurmountable issue. "Electrics" are just better. The end.
Lol, 4 % increase every year, so for cars we just hold all our power consumption and only use that 4 % increase in production for cars, and that's the only one arguement that is just bull, dont have the time to type all,
Hi, I live in Norway. We currently have a lot of EVs on the road and a very cold winter, which means a lot more expensive electricity (about 7 to 10 times more expensive than in summer). This hasn't created an energy problem, but a power problem. Some areas in our country simply don't have enough power for new power hungry industries to establish themselves because it would overload the grid. Another reason for this is because we decided to electrify our oil platforms, which is silly since we could just burn natural gas from the fields themselves, but now it's just exported and burned abroad. And sure, if you change all petrol cars into EVs, you'll need more energy and power. But you'll also shut down some refineries and other petroleum industry infrastructure that consumes a lot of electricity. That will mitigate some of the problems. There's also an issue with too much power consumption in the morning and afternoon as you mentioned, so we need a smarter grid where some power can be used at night instead.
why would refineries use much electricity and why would anyone charge in the morning or afternoon if electricity is cheapest at night? but if everyone is charging by night, it's not cheap anymore.... 7x more expensive at winter is just mind blowing, it's almost as all lakes you have are frozen and then you have almost no power. and here's this american praising you....
@@ivok9846 the Norwegian lakes _are_ all frozen, but that doesn't stop the hydro plants from working. - Yes, the price fluctuations are a bit crazy, but this January really is exceptional in that regard. Normally, Norwegian electricity is hardly more expensive than in the US, and in spring and summer it's actually much cheaper.
@@leftaroundabout Hi, where are you getting your prices? Norwegian electric prices are about double of that in America. You can't just look st the cost of a kilowatt, and ingnore the "net" cost. The prices in America is power plus net, here the only talk about the power price while ignoring the net.
You don’t need permission. Just put a dryer outlet in your garage or by the driveway, and plug in a portable EVSE. The power company won’t ever know what you’re using it for.
If everyone ran an AC every day for 4 extra hours than they normally do, I'm not sure the grid could take it The key phrase there is "more than they normally do" - a 50% increase in power usage for all citizens is significant.
The total amount of power used is not the issue. More power demand than supply is. If those 4 extra hours are during the low demand phase at night, the grid would have no issues. And since people running there AC actually is causing the highest point in demand, rznning them longer doesn't increase peak demand, just the average.
Depends on if you are topping off and use a low charge rate overnight vs drive the entire capacity of the battery and need fast charging for high daily use. *One average home A/C unit (3-4KW) is just a fraction of what a fast charger demands (20+KW)* You could turn on your AC +Water Heater, + Clothes Dryer + your OVEN to maybe draw 80 amps at 230VAC to equal a fast charger (that is just 20KW). High end fast charging is well above that rate. Now imagine all the sudden that 30% to 50% of your neighbors did that at the same time. The power grid wasn't built for that. Not in the residential areas.
@@PsalmFourteenOne Assuming they increased the power generation capacity by 30% so that everyone could have their electric cars. They'd need to implement a forced schedule on when people are allowed to charge their cars which isn't practical for most people. There's going to be days where you take that extra long trip and get screwed because it's "not your turn" to charge your car. It's just going to become chaos.
California produces too much electricity, they have to pay Nevada to take some off their hands. Most of CA's power outages are because PG&E find it cheaper to just shut off people's power when it's windy or hot and dry so they don't spark another fire rather than updating their powerlines. CA screwed up by building so much generation without enough storage, but at least some of the blame lies upon their for profit power company.
The 4%/year increase in grid capacity since the 60s is an average that mostly came from coal/nuclear/hyrdro/gas power generation systems. Would be interesting to see how much of the increase has come from wind & solar in the recent years.
I wouldn't put hydro/nuclear on the same level as coal/gas. Their respective environmental impact is really different (nuclear being the cleanest, followed by hydro and wind). Solar is theoretically clean, but producing solar panels and recycling them when they' re old can have a big environmental impact.
@@MrGardenofeden well hydro is clean on case of pollution but top built it it kills natural habitats like crazy, fish and other water animal homes and stop their migration... so effectively decimate them... just like wind turbines do with birds
yeah, that a big problem. As car tech gets better and fast charging get to 10mins for a fill up, That's never going to be available at home. so we are still going to be stuck fast charging at "gas stations" and then making a profit on the electricity.
In Norway they’ve piggybacked off the electrical wiring for street lights and such to provide curbside charging. Are Americans clever enough for that kind of solution?
And.... See California as an example on how NOT to force people into EV's. If you are going to tell people to switch, you need to make sure the infrastructure to support it... is in place.. Or, like CA, you tell people to not charge their cars or use AC because the power grid can't handle it.
So over 40 years our power grew 500% from .76Trillion KW to 3.8 Trillion KW but then grew only 8% over the next 20 years from 3.8 Trillion KW to 4.1 Trillion KW while stressing the grid to its limit and watching the cost of power explode (pun intended) With a growth rate of well under 1% over the last 20 years what would you expect a realistic growth rate to be over the next 20 years? And I'd point out that the point out that the growth rate between 1960 and 2000 was due in large part to the adoption of nuclear power. I'm sorry but you won't see that kind of large growth rate in the future if you're counting on wind and solar...
Texas is having once-a-century weather conditions. Power lines break, roads are impassable. Texas didn't have good backup systems, nor can they import energy through their grid.
i mean it kinda was though, texas was hit with a slightly less cold snap in 2011 that froze oil and shut down plants but they refused to weatherize their power lines or bury water lines below the frost line
@@MySuperman112 You are absolutely correct! Utilities never fix their reliability unless made to do so. Many utilities even claim they're allocating funds to bury power lines but never do.
@@justsomeguy934 All true but it's worth noting that the Pacific Northwest has experienced literally dozens of "once-in-a-century" floods over the last couple of decades. Along with several "once-in-five-century" floods. Global climate change makes such labels rather laughable.
Good video! One aspect I missed is the question how we would produce the extra 30% of electric power. Back in the 1960s, adding more coal or even nuclear plants would be not too difficult. Assuming we want to use clean energy now, and simultaneously replace polluting power plants with clean ones, the job is much more difficult. Not impossible of course, but I fear more complicated than you suggest.
@@ch4.hayabusa While not as bad as coal, they still pollute quite a bit. In the Netherlands, we're scaling down gas mining because this is causing earthquakes (and thereby damage to houses etc). So not ideal from that angle either.
It’s likely 2years to meet demand , as demand for EVs go up gas car demand drops . The amount of gas that needs to be extracted ,refined , shipped , transported will significantly drop electricity usage worldwide. Is this agreeable?
You also have to consider that during this time of 1960-2000, was when we were ramping up nuclear power and hydroelectric electrification. So, it was easy to see how we ramped up. Using wind or solar to create the equivalent power output will not be possible
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes. DOUBLE the power plants capacity. DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines. But all transportation electric, say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS, TRIPLE poles and wires, TRIPLE main grid. Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. For the long trip. The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority. The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV. The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour. The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money. Every building is connected to the grid. Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid. Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies. Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply. Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm. Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH . Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm. For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades. And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years. Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required. Insurance will not be available. If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min, The USA is the biggest target in the world. Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter. Military costs increase massively and national budgets. ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs. 75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades. Think, think, think 🤔 ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , just live in a fantasy.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 Good points. But also take into account the giant amount of electricity that's actually required to run a gasoline car, from the well to the pump. You have pump jacks that pump the oil out of the ground, that use something like 30,000 kw/hr per month for ONE. Then several gigawatt hours per year just for ONE medium sized oil refinery. Each gas station uses a crapload of power running all those high powered lights, pumps, convenience store etc. It's quite a bit. The real answer I think that's needed is to NOT destroy all the old power plants. Shut them down, and maybe dismantle the coal side of things. But we need to hurry up and invent a fusion power reactor. Then that can be installed in existing coal power plants, to provide superheated steam to the existing turbines. In many of the coal plants the steam turbines and generators and switchyard gear is still in good shape, all that's needed is to replace the source of steam with something less wasteful than burning up gas/coal.
@@brnmcc01 yep good thinking I didn't know the things you brought up. Thank you. We need real life facts. I wish I could cut and paste your input. The Fusion technology is still a distant furfy, climate destabilisation is the point even the nuclear promoters agree on. Rooftop solar PV systems as every building is connected to the grid. Every EV is near a building day and night. There are 13million EV today, 100,000 were predicted by todate. Every one is busy with life and do not have my background, I am free of corporate constraints and daily pressures. I have grandchildren and see a lot of vested interests and political distortion. Kodak film company invented the digital camera, things change if not constrained by vested interests, big vested interests.
@@brnmcc01 existing power plants do have a role to play. But if the coming renewable technology kills its cash flow it will fight back. Number one rule of business is maximum profit, actually by law. The transition is a complex problem. I just glossed over and looked at the biggest factors including climate destabilisation ! !
Amazing video. I get it but living in LA and having rolling blackouts every year currently puts my faith really low in how well this is all going to play out.
The rolling blackouts happen in the daytime, right? LA needs to have more people install rooftop solar, especially on west-facing roofs. LA also needs more large stationary batteries to let some of the daytime solar electric production be used in the first few hours after sundown.
And it's actually going to get worse. CA is going to shut down their last nuclear plant in a few years, that will have a huge impact, we already are finding out that windmill and solar farms are great when you have wind and sunny days, when you have little wind and cloudy days we have the blackouts as we saw this last summer. CA also has many con-gen plants sitting idle due to environmentalist's, will they allow production from them, remains to be seen.
this is why when the wife said she wanted an EV I got her a prius prime instead not much distance but she mostly uses electric and we have gas for road trips and when we forget to charge etc
@@calamityjean1525 In other words: "LA needs more people to have........................expensive equipment that the majority of the LA population can't afford"
Here in California they are going to outlaw natural gas fired furnaces starting next year. Also, I believe all new homes here are required to be completely electric with no natural gas appliances at all. That is when things are going to get interesting.
Especially considering Cali already has grid crisis situations with the demand for power consumption now reaching higher than the energy being produced now lol.
No, here in CA, gas furnaces will NOT be outlawed next year. People who have gas furnaces can continue to use them. However, it looks as though using gas will be outlawed in NEW buildings and new buildings will not be provided with gas. But until the electricity supply becomes more reliable, I see that as unreasonable. It would even be impossible to have a natural gas generator for emergency power. Although CA has been very forward looking and ahead of the rest of the country in many areas, there have been serious mistakes. One of the mistakes was shutting down nuclear plants for no good reason. The nuclear plants were already paid for and were generating cheap carbon free power. I myself have a heat pump which works quite well and is not unduly expensive to operate here in the desert.
And Here in L.A they have to do rolling blackouts because too many people had their A/C on. So unless they fix the power grid, this whole “push for EV everything” is doa.
You are missing subtracting the energy used for refining and transport of the fossil fuels being replaced. That is a significant draw on the grid. We will still need refineries for other products that don’t get burned, but the elimination of that energy being used for liquid fuel production should count in as well.
also EV's can also function as energy storage for the grid when they arent in use. its a concept called "the internet of things" and there are plenty of yt videos on it if you're interested
@@MySuperman112 if you're looking at EVs working as a battery to support the grid its known as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G). There are also concepts for Vehicle-to-Building (V2B) where the car provides power to a house or office block.
I think it's crazy to try to force people into ev do to the fact it takes a period time fully charge them, you aren't telling babies not to be calm. I don't think it's good at all.
Honestly I feel like a lot of plug-in hybrids are just great to get awesome parking spaces. I see people abusing this all the time and leaving Chevy Volts at the charging stations even after they're finished charging.
@@rob1andrews I used to be able to make biodiesel. 100% renewable, from waste fluid (fryer oil). Why did I stop? New diesels can't handle it. Why? Environmental controls limit use to about 20%. Why? Again. Recycling a renewable resource isn't green enough? Idiots making decisions. I once could safely make and store a renewable resource at my home. The side stream (glycerol) was composable or could could be sold off for soap products. Again.
Hybrids are pointless, you're maintaining two separate systems in one car it's like having two cars in one. Double the cost double the weight. It's not a good solution. Full electric or nothing.
@@chrisdigital Just wait and see what happens in the near future. Electric cars charge at a much higher draw than most houses, some fast charging systems draw many more times what the average home does. There's going to be a point where the grid can't support it. If you go full electric you better go full solar and don't expect to be able to go on long trips because the infrastructure isn't going to be there.
What a great and informative video! Another point to be made is that, along with the additional electrical usage, there will be a corresponding decrease in gas usage. Lots of large refineries also have power generation, so they can use the reduction in refining to provide more power.
Another factor that people in cooler regions will need to contend with is that E-vehicles don't fully defrost as combustion vehicles do. The part that bugs me most of all about a switch to EV though is the electronics that can now be overridden/updated remotely. Imagine just like your cell phone the manufacturers started limiting the performance of your phone's battery after a year, and car manufacturers make things not work as well in the car after the warrenty, or they disable features for used vehicles. On top of that, the ability of an entity to remotely disable your property and ability to travel is VERY concerning. One other problem I foresee is when software(like phone apps, or video games) no longer works because they cannot connect to the internet so they no longer start. This is already a problem with some software not working on new vehicles when there is no internet. Additionally, some companies have accidentally bricked(disabled) their products by updating them with faulty software (Electrolux Accidentally Bricks Thousands of Microwaves With OTA Update). An example of that is recently John Deer tractor was able to remotely disable stolen tractors in Ukraine over the internet. That was a good use for that but imagine that ability being abused later by governments or hackers.
Actually the opposite is happening at Tesla. There cars functionality has improved overall throughout the past decade. The batteries in these vehicles, properly cared for should last more than a million miles. They are also creating facilities to repurpose the raw materials from old batteries to be used in new ones. This should also decrease the raw materials needed moving forward. Personally the only way I see the grid in the US keeping up with demand is through nuclear in the northern states and solar in the southwestern states.
You make it sound like you can not disable the vehicles access to the internet which would keep them from accessing it would it not? I'm pretty sure I can shut off my Tesla from having internet access with a click of a button.
@@mrh3085 The company thats CEO is getting smeared relentlessly by corporate news. Thats good to hear about the million miles(does proper care mean stored in a garage at all times? whats that mean if you would eleborate), regarding a million miles, I dont know what that translates into years for a car that sits around alot vs a daily commuter?
@@jstar1000 I am not an insider or engineer at Tesla or any other EV company, nor do I own an EV, so I have no idea if they can remotely turn on the internet or not like a cell phone can be remotely turned on(thats why they made the batteries not removable - it really wasn't just because thinness or water resistence). I'm very interested in the tech BUT... I'm extremely hesitant no matter how benevolent one company is to trust them all. Additionally, I know some software stops working on other devices I own if they have not been updated for a long time. Somehow it knows(has a software timer im guessing) that if I have not connected this for a certiain amount of time it needs to be updated and wont work otherwise. I have a new combustion vehicle with the high-end options that when used with smart phones force the connection and won't allow the connection to turn off( I have tried turning off WIFI and Bluetooth and they keep turning back on until I use VPN and then it breaks connection) and I would bet $ they send information back to some server somewhere without most users understanding what that means, and likely could use that connection to adjust things on the vehicle unbeknownst to the owner if they don't turn off the internet as you suggest.
Um, his conclusion of a net increase in grid demand is false as he failed to subtract the energy required to refine petroleum into gasoline. So much energy is used to extract, refine, transport and store gasoline that the impact on the grid is none.
@@wallybal1297 I'm not sure of your question. The electricity requirements to refine a single gallon of gasoline have an average estimate of 5 kW/h. Some estimates are much lower (.22 kW/h refinery only), some are much higher (8 kW/h well-to-wheel) with an industry average of 5 kW/h per gallon. Where are you assuming 30% of national energy production?
@@justsomeguy934 I may have misinterpreted you here. Are you implying that there will not be a net increase of electricity demand, or that it would be less than 30%?
@@wallybal1297 As the demand for gasoline falls as drivers switch to electric vehicles, so will the energy demand used to refine it. This wasn't included in the overall energy use calculation for drivers. It depends where the refinery gets its electricity from. If they burn their own fuel to run their own generator, then it won't affect the local grid either way.
What a lot of people don't realize is how many big operations out there need to go onto curtailment during days of high energy consumption. I have to run my workplace on our diesel generators all the time. Even in the winter, we have to run our boilers on fuel oil.
While I agree with a lot of the points you bring up, as an electric engineer I feel like you're being VERY VERY optimistic about our current power grid and setups. It can be done, and you're absolutely right, but a lot needs to be fixed and updated in the structure to support such changes, it's not really comparable to summer when people use their ACs because summer will go away and the grid have room stabilize again either with raising the cost so people use less, or with other ways. Considering that electric car influx of consumption would be basically permanent as people would their cars every day to go to work and do their daily routine it's not just planning to high and low consumption in different seasons, it's an huge increase in consumption while also keeping the consumption we already have.
As an electrical engineer, is there a time when the electrical grid is underutilized? Can the cars charge then? If so, no problem. Also oil refineries use a lot of electricity.
Considering the current OAT in North Dakota is about 12 below zero, wind chill about 25 below....the amperage draw running electric heat in a vehicle, the heating element itself plus the blower motor added to the heated seat and rear window, side mirror defoggers, I would guess that EV would make it about 10 to 15 miles before the batteries went dead.
@@northdakotaham1752 70kw will keep you toasty for a long time... the model Y also has a heat pump so probalby will heat decently for quite a long time.
@@davidbeppler3032 I again bring up the issue of not having enough renewable energy sources to power even half of the current amount we spend. With this weird anti-nuclear stance, countries like Germany and Japan are going *back* to coal. How the hell is getting rid of petrol cars any better, if the power generated is just going to be produced by burning oil (that for some reason just became a lot cheaper!), coal and natural gas? Not to even mention the massive impact on the environment made by every single motor vehicle having to suddenly convert to using lithium based batteries. Where the hell is that going to come from? You have any idea how much destruction that would cause? Not to mention the pollution? What about freight? The massive freight ship engines run on diesel. What about airplanes? One trans-Atlantic flight causes more damage to the environment than all the fuel consumed by all 22 Formula 1 cars during the whole season. What about arctic areas? Or any areas where it gets cold enough to be freezing? Batteries deflate in the cold and operating range is reduced to almost nothing due to heating elements draining what little power is left. "But we could just build a lot more solar panels and then cover like the Sahara with them or something" Then what? In 25 years they're going to have to be replaced. Not to even mention how much that would cost, what about the billions of tonnes of toxic waste from the PV panels? More dams? Ecosystems have already been irreparably destroyed because of hydroelectric dams. Sea turbines don't produce enough energy. Neither to UTES systems. Fission will just produce more waste. That is the least harmful option. Guess we could just shoot the barrels into the sun or something some day. More funding on fusion! That's the ticket.
The problem with the increased energy demand is where it’s going to come from. The government doesn’t like nuclear so it’s going to come from “dirty” sources like coal and gas. Then pile on how terrible mining is for the resources to manufacture the batteries and it’s bad on top of bad on top of bad.
I grew up in Iowa. Today, about 60% of Iowa's electric power comes from wind. When the San Onofre nuclear plant unexpectedly closed in California, it took just 4 years for its entire output to be replaced with wind. Today, with better wind turbines and much better solar generation, it would be even less. Gas peaking plants are being replaced with storage. In addition to environmental and economic concerns, the initial driver for this was loss of the Aliso gas storage field. Yes, gas needs storage. I do think that lithium-ion batteries will be supplanted by more readily available materials in most grid applications. Mining impacts for generators and turbines needs to be considered as well when balancing the environmental books. But it's really hard to match the environmental impact of coal mining or oil extraction.
You have to know the current load on the system. A given transformer or line might already be near its limit. Loads like an AC are intermittent. They only draw a lot when the compressor kicks on. A constant load is calculated differently than intermittent loads which are the majority of household load considerations. No doubt some areas will handle it just fine. Others will need their lines or transformer upgraded. The real fun will be supplying parking lots full of fast chargers.
My home has a contracted potency of 6.9KW (30A@ 230V) AC Fast chargers are up to the 360KW mark, or over... One fast charger sucks up as much power as over 50 homes like mine operating at full capacity, and a lot of fast chargers will be needed.. That will be really fun Not mentioning AC to DC conversion losses or DC-DC voltage/amperage alteration losses
Today is the day that validates my warning to people that E.V.'s are just an intermediate step toward no vehicles period. A minister of the English government just announced recently that England plans to ban all personal vehicles...both ICE and electric. Instead, mass transit will replace them all. I saw the press interview myself. Why the ban? Because they already know they will never generate enough power ...like in Germany, where the costs are so high that people are being forced to choose between food and heat.
@@Froggability A woman working for Boris Johnson recently gave an interview stating that in the future England will "move away" from ALL personal vehicles...and everyone will be taking mass transit. What does that imply? That if you live in the country you will be forced to move into an urban centre...and the gov't will assume ownership of any property you leave behind.
Only 12% to 30% of the gas you burn in the car is used to move the car. It would be much more energy efficient to burn the gas in a power station and charge electric cars. Also, if gas and diesel are burned at a power station, pollution can be controlled much more efficiently too. So forget intermittent things like solar panels and wind generators, when the sun don't shine or the wind does not blow, burn fuel.
To keep it even simpler....a few summers ago when we were in a heat wave our county asked people NOT to use washers, dryers, or dishwashers until after the sun went down because just the uptick in A/C units was taxing the system. If the grid can't handle a dish washer or dryer during increased A/C use...how the heck is it going to handle 100s of thousands or millions of cars and trucks? Some stuff sounds good, but you need to THINK beyond just your bumper sticker.
What you describe is a poorly-planned grid, not anything inherent. Usually, this is due to a confluence of politics and short-term profit-taking. Political pressure to minimize power bills and maximize profits. Reliability and peak-handling capacity requires investment. With fossil fuels, it requires power plant capacity that sits idle most of the day, but can rapidly start up to meet peak demands. Those idle plants still consume capacity and some manpower. You also have to allow for outages due to maintenance or unexpected events. If your climate predictions are off, you may not build out enough. If your weather predictions are off, you might allow shutdowns that ought to be deferred to a lower-demand period. But you're right-you do have to THINK. Grid planning is a lot more complex than just adding up the numbers. You have to consider each potential bottleneck in a wide array of circumstances. Videos like this are great for getting a sense of what's feasible, and general approach. Actual execution is very complex, and requires considerable advanced planning as well as minute-by-minute execution.
Even just in my kitchen, I can't run the microwave, air fryer and coffee pot in the morning to fix breakfast. Those three appliances overtax the line voltage and trips the breaker for the line going to the outlets in the kitchen. So when that line trips, everything in the kitchen including the fridge and the stove shut off. The lights are fine as they're on a different breaker switch.
Yes, he didn't mention gas and oil heating, cooking and water heating will all have to change from current fossil fuel use. Water heating is EXTREMELY electric intensive, one of the highest consumers in an average house beside air conditioning, and usually runs year round.
@@bigsky1970 Why did your electrician put everything on one breaker? Normally a kitchen should be supplied by at least 2 strings or 3 strings if you got three phases.
everyone needs to get a good bit more familiar with how an EV charges its battery. They're not pulling major amps like an AC unit, a refrigerator a Stove or Dryer. its much closer to a trickle charge. Devices that have a large current draw at turn on, do tax the grid instantly, and they are an issue to be sure. but EV chargers don't pull that much at one time. they are built to ramp up slowly and the battery management systems onboard are designed to manage the charge so that over charging and individual cell quality issues can be mitigated as much as possible. This is all part of creating an EV battery system that will operate within the parameters of our current ( and outdated) grid transmission system.
@@TKUA11 no you have to pay for the charging (just as you would have to pay your electricity bill if you charged at home). You get a residents parking permit, just as you do now.
People don't charge everyday 24/7. A building with 100 apartments might only need 5 DC fast charges to meet demand. Each car might only charge for 1/2hr once a week.
Here in the UK, if all 10s of millions cars would switch to 50 -70 KWh EVs, and supposing there was a charging socket in every lamppost, the electric grid would collapse immediately. We need one-dozen brand new nuclear power plants to generate the electricity produced by 20 million cars, roughly 14 Terawatts. A single reactor costs 7 billions $, and a power plant contain from 2 to 4 reactors. Here they want to phase out ICE cars by 2030. Where they are going to get the 14 TWh? Thanks for the video...
@@Unknown-jl7mg They figured out the issue since atleast 2015. With sheer lack of grid power caused by the enviormental parties all over the place blocking the build of new power plants, which resulted in near crashes in unmeasurable volume many times since. Meanwhile the same parties are opting, ironically, for more electric power usage.
@@MrBerry1404 Nearly everything has to be electrified because we have to decarbonise our society if we don't want to destabilise it completely. We really don't have much choice. Those that move first are likely to do well out of it economically.
You forgot about Work Trucks, Tractor Trailers, Construction & Farm Equipment & Freight Trains to name a few that if were added I am sure the grid could not handle.. I really did like this video & the subject as I was wondering about it...
Thank you I was going to post a note and then I saw your comment. His formula has left out all of the infrastructure that we need to grow food and move packages around the country.
"In 40 years, we increase the amount of energy produced in the United States by FIVE TIMES." Yes, but in the last 20 years it has only gone from 3.8T kWh to 4.1 kWh. Why? Because unless it is a windmill or a solar farm the government won't allow it. At that rate, the 30% increase required for EVs would take about a century...not 6.5 years. Unless we want to start generating energy like we did in 1970?
This ends badly, we’re going to find out the hard way that the electric grid and renewable generation won’t support electricity demand and high penetration of EVs. Lessons learned from what’s happening in Europe will be ignored by many in the US
In the US when there are hot weather conditions throughout the country and everyone is running their air conditioner, there are rolling blackouts. Now just imagine everyone trying to charge their EV at the same time on top of that, it's not gonna end well.
@@BillAnt I literally just read an article about CA power officials begging people to reduce power use when the grid is overworked the most (4pm to 9pm) yet they think the grid can handle EVERY car being electric. Ya that sounds smart.
This analysis leaves out several critical points: 1. Average home likely has 2 cars. 2. Where does the electricity come from? Most likely gas or coal. 3. Over the life of an EV, there is a much larger carbon output than an internal combustion engine vehicle (when factoring how much carbon is produced during manufacturing and charging cycles)...on average 20 tons more per car. So, not really a "green" solution. If you actually care about the overall environmental impact, a hybrid is a much more "green" solution. Less overall carbon output than EV or ICE over the useful life of the vehicle. 4. Human behavior. You are assuming people are going to follow the charging limitations....they simply won't...for a variety of reasons. 5. The EV hype is a big fat lie! A placebo. It will continue to be a giant scam until power grids are generating electricity from a source other than coal or gas...which represents like 95% of the power plants in the U.S.
What will be electricity saved from reduction in oil refineries however? Just net increase, but the big one as we're starting to discuss here in the UK is home heating. Cars arent that bad but imagine running your house heating, cooking etc. just on electric. That's hella lot of juice.
in brighton (just outside of boston) they are trying to ban natural gas. a lot of towns are. everyone wants electric. we can't keep up. factor in power outages etc and it will hault the economy when it happens. need to keep it as it is, diversified
I'm from the US so there will be an additional factor for you (as 1.2 IMP gal = 1 US gal): There are 139,600BTU/gal 1BTU = 0.000293kWh So if you know how many gallons you use, or how many BTUs you require, you can figure out how many kWh of electricity it will require. Annually, if I were to heat with electricity I'd consume ~20,744kWh. I live in New England, we have 6,531 HDD (heating degree days) per year. that is roughly 3 cord of wood, 2.53tons of coal, or 507 gallons of oil (measures are different across the pond though). Note: that is electric resistance heating, I have to do the math on a heat pump, which should be considerably more efficient.
Currently, it's more efficient to burn natural gas for heat, than to make power out of it. Unless everyone went to heat pumps, I don't see the advantage of going electric with heat, unless you have an overabundance of renewable.
Wow! From the point of the camera, it seems that entire presentation was done from memory. Maybe there were notes on the dash but it doesn't seem they were frequently referred to during the drive in some beautiful area. What a genius Jason is.
Lol, after the "cold snap" in Texas I can tell you, currently, ERCOT won't let this whole EV thing happen here. (The timing of this video is just fantastic!)
funny thing is you can use electric cars as energy storage for homes during blackouts. but ercot wont like that cause they cant charge higher rates like they are now
Adding 30% to the power grid doesn't sound like a challenge until you realize that it's supposed to happen during the same time that most common means of energy production are also being significantly reduced... Or even banned. Currently most EVs actually run on coal. Because that is the source of most electricity in the US. But politicians have demonized coal and are actively trying to reduce the number of coal plants as we speak. If every state in the country were to start production on a new massive supermodern nuclear plant, everyone's switching to EVs might sound like a possibility. Right now it's a ridiculous pipe dream
@Robert Stanley You are actually very wrong. Many refineries actually INJECT power into the grid, it's called Cogeneration, they use the heat from combustion of some of the products to distill the crude and any waste heat is used to generate electricity, most of it is actually injected into the power grid. As for the consumption at the pump, how many KWs does a fuel pump at a gas station suck up? 2kw? L2 charging is between 3.5kw and 22KW, L3 goes up to 350KW. So charging an EV puts more load into the power grid than pumping gas.
@Robert Stanley The Sines refinery in Portugal installed a Gas fired Cogen setup in 2009. I tried to put a link up but the comment got automatically deleted. I reckon other refineries would do the same thing, extra money from the electricity sold, increased process efficiency, and looking good for the Greenies. All wins. As for the PV argument, that only works if a battery is included in the installation. If not, you still put a load on the grid, both ways if everyone does it. Because most home charging is done AT NIGHT.
So as a US based consumer.. *WHY* would I want to change from my ICE cars to an BEV car that has all these limitations on range and timing of charging? How do I benefit?
If you have home charging, it's more convenient. Also you aren't limited on when you charge, he was talking about how time of use rates can get people who want to save money to not charge right when they get home. I have a plug in hybrid so I never have to go buy gas unless I'm on a road trip, home charging is awesome.
@@TAWithiam For local and if the homes service can support it ok. But 2-3 times a r I drive 1000miles non-stop. ANd of coarse the return 1000miles non-stop. (takes 16hrs) For me... I want to be able to do that.
Home charging is more convenient, newer EVs easily get 300 miles of range and when you can charge at home it’s a non issue, EVs have less maintenance and moving parts Biggest issue is how long will the battery last and road trips
exactly... using percentages to prove your point is disingenuous. 30% of 10 is 3, and 30% of 100 is 30. So saying, "we were able to increase power production by 30% in just a few short years before would mean that we can do it again" is just asinine! That is no different than arguments by the Biden Administration saying that inflation rate of 8.3% isn't that bad because it barely moved an inch from the previous year's rate of 8.2%. Percentages make a crisis look like a hiccup! It is the raw numbers that matter in this case!
Also doesn’t help that almost all those increases were done with fossil fuel plants. But now they want to do solar and wind so that 30% increase is going to be even harder.
The Tesla lets you control that by app, and I can't imagine the other top-tier car manufacturers don't have similar setups. Plus, most of the car charging happens during the night and evening off peak need (because most of it is after you get home from work and top off after your daily commute).
@@hadleyjolley3375 yes... There's control through the car, and some charging options are wifi connected, and can control charging too. Incentives to slow down charging when needed seems like an obvious solution. Like Amazon offers a $1 for using slower shipping.
However letting the driver choose the time, would defeat the overall value of that. You know as well as I do that if average Karen Sue or Leroy Bob is low on charge when they pull in, they will charge starting immediately. Teen driver(s) started 30 minutes ago, cause they have a date and their old EV clunker (you stuck them with) has little battery life. So a four EV family pulls in from school, practice, work, and the gym at around 6pm. They all hit the charger. You had to install 4 to avoid fights last year. Same time the microwaves, air fryers, stoves, lights, TVs, PCs, gameconsolesallcome on right about then in a mad dash to warm dinner. Everyone on the block does exactly the same. Look at your cellphone for an example. BTW 6PM Solar and Wind die, and the duck rears its head to be slayed by the fossil fuel powerplant. You can discourage this with higher prices at higher use times, but we all know, at best, only one person in a house gives a damned about the cost. Turn off the lights Heather. Ohhhh you're such a nagg.
Again the problem is using the absolute amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline for the calculation. Yes, there is 33.7 kwhrs in a gallon of gasoline, but on average less than 30% of it is utilized. Furthermore, the issue is more the energy USED to MAKE gasoline, which is at least 8 kwhrs which then gets displaced to go towards charging evs. These are huge factors needed for this calculation and not seen anywhere. So yeah, the numbers will end up being far lower than seen here.
You should probably take into account that electricity production in the U.S has not seen a net increase since 2007, and current regulations make it very difficult and costly to on-line any new significant production facilities. The slight increase of production coming from renewable sources in the past 15 years has been dwarfed by the net reduction in generation from coal-fired plants, while natural gas has seen the biggest net increase as coal plants are converted to natural gas. To increase production by 30% will require some significant changes in energy policy and regulation, and achieving that in 6.5 years is not only unrealistic, but impossible at this point. If, however, the regulators would open pathways for more nuclear generation, and/or return to clean coal, we could see that goal met in 20-30 years. The most realistic expectation, however, is that we continue to increase production from burning natural gas to meet the goal, and increase the rate at which we build natural gas fired plants - which negates the whole purpose in the first place. The biggest problem, however, comes from the manufacture of all those lithium batteries, as their functional lifespan simply is not yet long enough to be practical on such a large scale. It's difficult enough to fathom mining enough lithium and rare earth minerals to produce enough batteries to replace every I.C.-powered vehicle with electric, but then you need to consider the compounded affect of repeating that entire process every 2-5 years in battery production. Technology simply isn't there yet, nor is it even on the cusp of being on its way there. So, until we overcome some of these massive hurdles, let's be happy that the idea of owning an EV as an individual is even plausible, and aim for a more realistically-sustainable goal, such as 5%. And until then, let's restart oil extraction and increase gasoline production in order to not bankrupt families while we let the technology continue to develop on an organic course. If it becomes commercially viable on a large scale, individuals will naturally transition for convenience sake. That's the ticket.
I was going to say the same thing. EPA and left leaning politicians and activist don't want any new nuclear, coal, gas or other plants. So how do you even get 10% increase with that? Wind and solar wont do it. I am really curious how this "easy" 30% will be created. We desperately need new nuclear plants, but even I worry about the waste products. So does that mean some new "cleaner" coal and gas plants? Has to be or we all suffer rolling blackouts nationwide. I bet the latter because the progressives seem to want us to all suffer and for long periods of time.
Additionally, having everything seemingly dependent on electricity, creates less competition, holding us hostage to power companies and price hikes. Also, what about foreign interference with our power grids, an attack so to speak? People don't understand that once a power grid goes down, it's not simple to get the grid back and running -different than a local power outage. Electricity doesn't move on it's own, it has to be cycled or moved. If everything runs on electricity in the future, including all new vehicles and our power grids go down, there's no way to mobilize our military for more than a short time (if it's all gone electric) and citizens would be extremely limited in their ability to travel, go to work, evacuate etc. Besides the negative environmental impact of producing electric vehicles and the far higher cost to purchase an electric vehicle, there's other factors we should be looking at too.
What about foreign interference with oil production, which we are currently right now experiencing, resulting in hugely inflated gas prices? I’d rather drive a car I can power with anything. Gas, diesel, propane, grid power, solar panels… I can even slap a TEG on the side of my wood stove and charge it off of that. I’m not chained to the price of a barrel of oil, and I don’t suffer when there is a local gas shortage, OR a power outage.
@@RealBenAnderson Foreign interference with oil production? You mean Russia's control of Nord-Stream 2 that the Trump administration repeatedly warned was a horrible and risky idea? Here in the U.S. we have the means to be energy independent, and the Biden Administration has chosen to reduce our production, cancel further projects, and penalize the fossil fuel industry into submission. THAT is why the U.S is paying 5.00-6.50/ gallon for fuel and even more for diesel. The demand for energy hasn't decreased, it's increased, but we now have to look to other countries for that energy - countries that have far far less and sometimes no regulation on production standards. All these geniuses buying / forcing the market toward electric cars thinking they're doing the world a favor don't realize it takes fossil fuels to produce the electricity to charge them. Beyond that the ecological impact of producing massive batteries that run electric cars exceeds that of the production and operation of a modern gasoline powered car. This forced global movement toward electric everything will be the folly of the next decade and possibly longer.
@@Fmandan77 I’m so glad you care so much about the environment. Personally, I drive an EV because it’s superior technology, not because of anything to do with the environment, although a reduction in pollution sure is nice, and it takes less energy to charge an EV than it does to refine gasoline. So, you’re burning diesel to pump oil, then burning coal to refine it, then burning it again in a car… seems pretty wasteful to me. But what do I know, I’m just a libtard that voted for Trump twice. Wait, what? Yeah, also a gun-carrying pro-life evangelical Christian Army veteran. But go ahead and put me in a box so you don’t have to deal with me.
@@RealBenAnderson Did I insult you somehow? How am I putting you in a box? I don't know you at all. I simply responded to your comment about foreign interference of oil production because I don't think global events are the entire reason for high gas prices in the U.S. There's no shortage of information out there about the amount of energy required to produce electric vehicles, let alone keep on running everyday. That amount of energy far exceeds that of refining petroleum. I value the free-market with sensible government regulation. I believe hybrid cars that run on both gasoline and electricity are an amazing compromise, as well as ultra efficient small displacement gasoline engines. If people want electric vehicles, like Tesla's, then let the manufactures compete for the market share so that consumers truly get a quality product at a competitive price rather than forcing the creation of a market that doesn't exist (yet).
Actually there will be millions of more competitors due to home solar lmao, you are thinking the grid will be centralized when in reality a smart grid would be decentralized so a whole area wouldn't ever have a blackout just a few houses. If you and you neighbors generate electricity you are less vulnerable to market variability. I don't think anyone is arguing that a tank should be electric, the energy density won't be there for another few decades. And yes with OPEC, we totally weren't being influenced. Again having a decentralized network would make it harder for cyber attacks to be effective, and it would be harder for a government to withhold materials to affect commodity prices.
@@user-xb5zu6zu7j no nie, zawsze będziesz mógł podjechać do stacji paliw narodowego koncernu paliwowego i "zatankować" jedyny prawilny prąd z wungla ;)
@@SlawcioD yeah hydrogen is cool but it's not a simple solution to implement either, first off making the hydrogen, an easy process but takes tons of electricity to it, then there is the storage and transport of the hydrogen, you have to compress it to have enough density to make it worth it, so you have have to have a completely new grid of high pressure storage tanks in distribution and fueling stations, then there is converting all the trucks, and don't forget to mention that at the end of the day you have a bunch of trucks driving around with a bomb attached. (compressed hydrogen tanks+crash=booom, ever see a picture of the graf zeppelin going up in flames, and that wasn't even compressed hydro) at least with electric, the distribution grid has already been started.
I always love your informative videos. There are other factors: changing weather patterns- declining Lake Mead levels can stop hydroelectric power generation for a big part of the Western US population; closing coal plants to reduce power input to the grid; the costs incurred by electric companies for increased demand- and pollution- will be passed on to all consumers, or potentially be limited by environmental regulations. The real irony is that ultimately electric cars are coal cars, as much of the electricity was generated by coal.
coal is around 20% of US energy production and dropping so your last comment is a bit odd. Excellent point about the pending hydro issues out west though. It's only 6% nationwide, but on a local level it is definitely an added hurdle.
As a retired auto mechanic/coal power plant worker, using EV's in the upper Midwest will show what cold winters will do to battery usage maintaining cabin heat, and more importantly throw road salt at high voltage wiring will result in fires that nobody is talking about! This summer the Midwest power grid is almost at a tipping point. My employer power company is looking into higher fees for higher current needs for EV's in the future.
Norwegian here👋 There are several ways this issue has been handled here. Parking lots at malls and office buildings often have a proportion of spaces exclusively for EVs equipped with chargers. At least one company, Easee, make "smart chargers" that don't charge during peak hours. That said, EVs are mostly adopted in urban areas. Because driving distances in urban areas are a lot shorter here than in US urban areas, power consumption from everyday drives are probably here.
I guess you guys don’t have the 120V issue either. Here, if you want to charge without any infrastructure through a standard outlet, you’re limited to 1500W. In Europe you have standard outlet rated for almost double, which mean that way more people can charge without having a wall plug installed at home.
In the UK, we’ve had power companies offering cheaper power overnight for quite some time. These are usually referred to as “Economy 7” plans that offer cheaper electricity from midnight to 7am and you just have to have a special meter installed to track your peak and off-peak power usage
@@raytrevor1 maybe, maybe not. The dynamics of cheaper off-peak power will still exist, and the power grid will hopefully be robust and diverse enough that we won't need to rely on discounts to steer people away from consuming at certain times. Besides, unlike demand, wind (and solar to an extent) output is relatively unpredictable; consumers can't schedule their car charging/wash cycles/etc at "cheap" times in such a system and can't really know about those stats in the first place. In effect, you'd only be using a lot of electricity during "high output" periods by chance, because you wouldn't know about that schedule to begin with. And as a power company, I also have no real reason to discount my electricty in this case (whereas its currently done to smooth demand in the face of constant-ish supply).
@@tangydiesel1886 you have a pretty high wind generation percentage now - expect there to be some factors to encourage use when that % is very high... cars are smart enough to stay connected and use it cost effectively, if people can find a way to stay parked at a charging point (of whatever design...)
@@lylestavast7652 I can see that coming. It is crazy how fast our grid has changed, where we make more wind power now, than any other form of electricity. Our population is pretty low compared to other states though. I could see in populated areas, electric cars could be used as grid storage, and people could op in to allow discharging during the day, and get payed for it.
Here's the fact's, I've been getting emails all week asking to turn down the heating unit and not use electric stoves or water heaters because the electric grid is at maximum capacity and they had to shut down 2 substations and do rolling black outs, this is in Louisiana, never mind the problems Texas is having!
Nicely done. Many observers are missing the hypothetical part of this video: “……if all cars in the US were suddenly EV’s all at the same time. “His point is that the grid could handle the increased demand if this hypothetical changeover happened. I have talked with numerous folks who are, for any number of reasons, anti EV. The question they ask, that there is no easy answer to, is how much fossil fuel is burned in the power generation end to fully charge an EV. In my opinion, there is an increasingly powerful shift towards renewable energy (wind and solar) as their cost comes down and fossil fuel reserves dwindle. I’m old, and I won’t see how this plays out, but I am confident that the world as we know it would not exist without electricity, but at some point it will exist without coal, natural gas, and oil.
My house is at the end of a tap line and if everyone on our block charged at the same time, I think it's more that our immediate transformer could take. We increased our energy supply 30% in the 40 year time period to meet demands without EV's, what percentage in addition to that 30% will the EV's need over the next decade or so? If EV's are exceeding 100 mpg equivalent, there's a lot of savings at the gas pump.
" I'm worried our transmission lines will melt like a fuse." Given that 95% of electric car owners charge off-peak, that's not a problem. User demand for energy during peak times is the real variant.
The batteries could be made to supply the grid when needed and increase reliability and stability. Everyone can't come home turn on the AC and electric range plus plug in Their TESLA and their RIVIAN, NFW, If it was not for the reduction of incandescent lamps the grid could not have handled the addition of loads from computers.
We added solar power to our house 4 years ago, and haven’t painted an electric bill since. We’re planning on purchasing an EV in late 2023-early 2024. Can’t wait to eliminate another expense!
The history rabbit hole of air conditioning and refrigeration is fascinating and everyone should check it out, we really take it for granted now. I'm glad he made that comparison
Can you please do an episode about lithium mining. Is there enough known lithium on the planet for everyone to be driving EVs? Will we just be trading one limited resource for another? Thank you for the information. I love how prepared you are that you recite the info while driving around. Seeing car people like you buying EVs helped push me to by one. I've been driving a Model 3 for just over a month and truly believe it is a better car in almost every single way at least for a daily driver commuter car. If people still want gas cars for toys I think that's just fine. But I think at least 95% of the cars on the road would be better off if they were electric. Thanks!
With new battery technology there is enough raw material “KNOWN” to build 4 batteries for every car on the planet. And there will be more and more materials found as demand increases.
@@justsomeguy934 Until the wild fire season, PG&E and SCE equipment fail causing massive fire shutting down the grid. Then all the peaker high pollution plant start running. Then it becomes a problem. Like FSD, every is fine until it disengage and you thought it is still working and you hit a truck or a divider. Everything work until it doesn't. I am still for electrification, but we are not ready. That is reality.
@@chrislu9574 " I am still for electrification, but we are not ready. That is reality." What you describe are California's energy problems and I assure you that they are due to California's politics, not renewable energy. PG&E will poison you and leave you without power if it means a better bottom line on their balance sheet. I live in a cold, mountainous state where -10F is common in winter and we have 30% renewable energy. Ultra-reliable, cheap energy. PG&E's grid failing during fires is their fault for lack of maintenance and planning. We're already electrified, you're using it to write your message. That is reality.
So what is the trade in value of an ev nearing the end of its battery life? I would NEVER buy a used ev. Total range drops as the batteries age and there's no getting around that. Therefore the secondary market for ev's will be crap. Once dealers realize that nobody wants to buy a used ev they will not give much in trade for one. Remember, dealers need to make at least 20% profit on your trade in. Further, there's a point where battery replacement costs more than the total value of the car and you can only kick that can down the road so far. This is just my opinion though.
One more engineering factor to take into account: conduit aging. Fresh oxygen-free copper is an exceptional electrical conductor. However, once it begins to interact with oxygen, it becomes cupric oxide which doesn't allow for the flow of electrons hardly at all. In fact, traditionally clad copper wires lose about 50% of their conductivity over 20 years. While extra capacity has been built into the last mile of our power grid to account for this progressive loss, the added demand for charging electric cars could necessitate rewiring many neighborhoods, as well as some homes, if the increased risk of fire is to be avoided. This would not be cheap for the consumer, especially when one should expect the price of copper to greatly increase with such a massive world-wide demand.
This is WRONG! Copper does not have any appreciable loss in 100 years. Further there are very few remaining long haul copper transmission lines. Almost all are stranded aluminum with a steel center support. Aluminum also has negligible conduction loss with age. It forms a microscopic layer of oxide which stops further oxidation. Average loss from the power plant to the user is only 5%.
Don't know where you live, but in Arizona I worked in the field at an electric utility and never heard of replacing wire because it was old, corroded, or whatever. All the wire I saw was aluminum all the way through. Never saw any transmission level line, but never saw it being replaced either.
Interesting and well thought out. I still have a few concerns though. First is the increased cost of electricity that will inevitably occur when everything is dependent upon the grid. Second is the environmental cost of increased power production, even through “green” means. Third is that projecting increases in available power based on what we did in the past fifty years is pretty sketchy, particularly given the amount of government involvement required to improve the power grid. The last ( for now) is that increasing power output across the board puts the power producers into competition with EV manufacturers for materials that are in short supply, and environmentally damaging to procure and process. This seems more and more like a zero sum situation where mobility is concerned.
It's actually decreased overall energy production (electricity and fossil fuel), since EVs are way more efficient than gasoline cars. Oil production will fall, since most is used for transportation, and oil production has a high environmental cost. Electricity production will have to increase. Currently, electricity production in the US is VERY roughly 40% natural gas, 20% coal, 20% nuclear, and 20% renewables (hydro, wind, solar, etc.), with coal dropping, renewables increasing, and the others relatively stable. So, an EV currently gets around 40% of its electricity from non-fossil fuel sources, which is already an advantage. Plus, stationary natural gas generators have an efficiency advantage over an inefficient automobile engine which wastes tons of heat energy. And, as the grid uses more renewables and less fossil fuels, EVs that charge from the grid automatically do the same. That's not true for gasoline cars.
You use the figure 33.7 kWh per gallon of gasoline. This is the amount of heat energy available from burning one gallon of gasoline, not the amount of mechanical energy that can be produced by an internal combustion engine running on one gallon of gasoline. Remember, an ICE is only around 30% efficient due to the second law of thermodynamics. On the other hand the efficiency of large electric motors is in the high 90’s. For example a Chevy Bolt gets about 4 miles per kilowatt hour. A similar size and weight car might get around 30 mpg. From this comparison you can see that a gallon of gas is roughly equivalent to 7.5 kWh when used to power a car. You can do this comparison between your Tesla and your gas powered car. This has a profound effect on the messages in your videos about electric cars. One quarter the number of flavored sparkling water cans, one quarter the load on the power grid.
*Texas's energy grid has left the chat*
yeah well, record freezing temperatures (shutting down infrastructure) is a little different than simply increased power demand.
@@Patrick94GSR actually it's the same. What happens when you lose power? As a Floridian we stock up on gas during hurricane season. Try doing that with batteries 😂
@@ckilgore3983 Once-a-century weather conditions are NOT the same as a balanced power plan, which Texas does not have. The cannot import energy in any significant quantity when they have a shortage. Blame the politicians, not renewable power.
Ask the politicians WHY they deregulated the energy in Texas and failed to require/maintain the infrastructure.
aaaand blackout chimed in !
the most impressive feat i find in this video is the consistent ability to recite numbers and facts while driving at the same time
I was thinking the same thing!
I thought the same. I was wondering if he had a cheat sheet on the windshield.
Because he is not a fake engineer who just got the diploma's.
The sums are not very hard, and he did the research and worked out the answers beforehand. Anyone properly numerate can do this, given the presentation practice someone like Jason has had. (Without that practice it'll have an awful lot of 'erm's in it and be noticeably less clear).
@@motorpsykler thats a good point... notice that he drives down a winding rural road, and he does not drive on urban streets with many intersections, road signs , traffic, etc etc
so in the place of where other people might put a GPS, he could have a tablet with a teleprompter scrolling the script for him
As a norwegian I find your examples from Norway interesting. As you say, yes we can handle it today, but just barely at times. This past month it has been very cold, and prices for kwh has gone through the roof. Energy companies have trouble coping with the peaks and tells EV owners to charge at night. However,...the politicians have got electricity on their brains, and EVERYthing shall be electric in the not so distant future. Boats, ferries, lorrys, buses, excavators, chain saws, tractors, motor bikes, and within 2040 all domestic aviation shall be electric if dreamers are right. Will the grid struggle then?? Oh yes...
And still with over 50% of new car sales -- EV cars in Norway are only ~~6%~8% of all vehicles (and probably top of the share from country fleet worldwide)
There are 2.8 milion registered passanger cars and overall 5.6 milion of vehicles registered (including trucks, tractors, bikes, mopeds, snow scooters, buses etc.) --- and even with 54% of all new vehicle sales that's only about ~~100 thousand new EV every year. So it would take about 20 years to change only half of cars in Norway to electric.
In 2020 there was only (with the high market share in new cars over 50% in new car sales) 346,921 battery cars and 142,858 hybrid vehicles (plug in) -- this is only half a milion of ev + plug in hybrids from 5.6 vehicles overall (so that gives 6% of all cars are BEV or 8,7% are BEV or hybrid), that is a large number of EV cars but not so impressive compared to number of cars overall.
Norway also produces very clean energy due to nature (97% of country elecricity comes from hydroplants/waterdams) - not every country has that. So it makes more sense to switch. But there is also very cold for a few months winter and you have to plug in the car for the night to keep battery warm or have it stored in a warm garage. (EV left for more than 24h in -20 Celcius = lost guarantee on battery pack (Tesla?)?)
So they taxed ICE cars to be more expensive than EV (normal Golf did cost more than EV Golf years ago)- this is half of the success but the switch is happening not because people wanted ev's or they were cheaper but due to tax reasons :) Still a nice experiment to see. Hope that won't end like every other socialistic experiment :P
“Will the grid struggle then?” - probably _not,_ because in Norway we have it stupidly easy to get at much more electric energy: by further expanding the hydropower capacity, and wind could provide the same amount again - at least if it weren't for the fact that most regions don't want to have the turbines in their nature.
I would agree however that most _other_ countries would indeed struggle to get to a comparable level of electrification, short of building lots of new nuclear plants.
@@leftaroundabout Nope. You shouldn't have problems - that's why EVs in Norway make more sense. As at night the usage is probably minimal, and you don't have to use AC in your home at summer (if at all) that much due to climate. What is the main heat source for homes ? Natural gas or wood or something else ?
What about cooking? Do you cook with gas or electricity? How do you heat buildings? With gas or what?
That's the problem, the government that always wants to speed up things just because THEY want.
I agree about your AC comparison. But... Here in California, mid summer CA's infrastructure cannot keep up with AC use alone. Hence our annual rolling black outs
lot easier to shift demand for charging to an off-peak period than cooling. also what annual rolling blackout? fake news made a big deal out of this summer's worst ever heatwave but they avoided blackouts with one simple trick: a text message. lol. big brain texas collapsed with a little bit of snow.
A/C runs all day and half the night...in many parts of the country.
@@ericdahl696 Where I live, which is in a desert, in summer the normal high is greater than 100F and the normal low is greater than 80F. Therefore the air conditioning runs 24 hours per day. However, I have a split unit in the master bedroom so I can keep it cool enough and let the rest of the house stay a bit warmer. That at least saves some energy. During winter the system acts as a heat pump. Because the low temperature during winter is rarely lower then 40F, air source heat pumps work quite well.
I heard about that in the news. And accoding to what I read, CA has 1M EV cars, a long way from the ICE cars there. EV owners deny it all.
You can't avoid brining human overpopulation into any energy discussion, but growth is treated as a given. That's a big problem.
I remember living in Los Angeles 8 years ago when a heat wave hit and literally street lights, billboards and traffic lights were constantly being shut down so that the grid could make it. No one even owned an EV back then and people drove around in cars to cool off.
I think something similar happened a few months ago
There will always be reasons against innovation, they never hold up but people try again every time
CA must have a really bad electric infrastructure.
shows how incredibly inefficient ACs are, we need to switch to more efficient methods of cooling.
US grid infrastructures are old and outdated.
The electrical code only allows a certain amount of load to be on certain sizes of conductors, transformers, breakers, etc. Increasing load would require major upgrades to electrical infrastructure which takes years and a lot of money. You can't just put a constant 1800VA load on each house in the neighborhood and hope the pole transformer fuse won't blow.
Or the transformer its self doesn't blow. Pretty neat when they do.
Will blow for sure
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE
So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes.
DOUBLE the power plants capacity.
DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines.
But with ALL transportation electric, then say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS,
TRIPLE poles and wires,
TRIPLE main grid.
Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. And For the long trip.
The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority.
The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV.
The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour.
The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money.
Every building is connected to the grid.
Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid.
Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies.
Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply.
Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm.
Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH .
Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm.
For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades.
And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years.
Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required.
Insurance will not be available.
If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min,
The USA is the biggest target in the world.
Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter.
Military costs increase massively and national budgets.
ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs.
75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades.
Think, think, think 🤔
ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , and just live in a fantasy.
Then too what about regional distribution? And will the house's power system handle the added load?
Utility fusing doesn’t fallow electrical “safety“ code…they are normally fused at 200-300% more than what consumers fusing requires..Utility fusing is designed to protect the supply of power not the hardware.If a single piece of equipment fails and hydro for the rest of the grid is still energized it’s working perfectly.
Utility electrical engineer here: You missed a huge category - lack of transmission infrastructure. We lack the long distance transmission line capacity to move power from where renewable energy is being produced, to the cities where it will be used. So we can have enough generation, and the local grid can have the capacity to handle the peak load, but there may be no way to get the power from the point of generation to the point of consumption due to lack of capacity on the bulk electric system (BES).
There you go with fact and logic. Albeit very true.
@@timstone3441 Facts and logic are ignored in the world of EVs and politicians currently.
Bingo, perhaps this dreamer needs to go back to the drawing board. It's OK he graduated from the same University Joe O'biden failed economics and you see where that got us. We don't need electric cars and loose our freedom. Think of allowing the government to further dictate us like the gas shortage and baby food shortage. The stupidity has to stop. So go get a job...
Need to build out a network of HVDC lines. These are more immune to solar flares, EMP etc. There's a few in operation already to move power from up north in Canada down to southern California. Lookup Pacific DC Intertie. Another good thing about HVDC is it doesn't depend on the grid frequency to remain in sync, if the system frequency starts getting unstable, it can start a widespread cascading blackout like in the northeast in 2003. By using DC for interstate transmission it would help to isolate these type of incidents to prevent the entire grid section from collapsing.
@@brnmcc01 It’s the age old problem of trying to move DC vs moving AC. Transmission loss is a real problem. I agree the lack of transmission capacity is part of the problem. But the biggest problem in the Grid is the ability to at will increase output when demand spikes. Increased demand is what causes black and brown outs.
In 2015, we started installing Mr. Fusion home kits along with 1.21 GW flux capacitors. If they haven't made it to your neighborhood yet, be on the look out for a guy named Marty.
When they go kaboom they'll send your house back to the future
What's really amazing is he's talking all these numbers while driving.
If I have a really difficult problem on my mind, I'll often do the same thing while driving my otherwise empty car. What I find amazing is that he doesn't take momentary pauses when something on the road demands his attention.
He's an engineer. It's just a simple maths on a subject he most know in depth. But I agree....I would have a hard time doing the same !
Yes, makes me forgive his division error: 30/4=7.5 yrs, not 6.5 years 😉
@@lent6114 Well, interest of interest (exponential development). He even put up the formula in the video. So the ~6.5 is correct (it is 6.69 years).
@@jensageholm8774 I see what I did. Thought he was just averaging the increase. On a 40 year basis for the five-fold increase, it's 4.11% annual increase. So, closer to 6.51 years to increase our production by 30% at that rate. Thanks for the correction.
Love your back of the envelope calculations. I got my electrical engineering degree in 1970 and worked for an electric utility for 30 years. I then spent another 15 years working as a consultant to electric utilities, my specialty was remote monitoring and control. While I would be the last to say this problem "is beyond the capability or the American engineer," I would like to point out some issues which you either neglected or glossed over too lightly. I think the key is we have to begin today to solve this problem. Because the electric utility industry is so capital intensive, the old system of public utility regulation, allowed the utility to plan five ten or even 20 years into the future and and make a reasonable profit on that investment. Today we are leaving generation and and a lot of transmission investment to the non-regulated segment which is not promised a reasonable return on their investments. Solar, wind, geothermal and other renewables are great, but some additional base-load is needed too. In the 60's, 70's and 80's many utilities built "fat" into their systems. This "fat" (allowed for the planning for reasonable contingencies) served several purposes. A flatter demand curve is not necessarily always a good thing for the grid. Starting in the 90's that "fat" was sacrificed in the name of cheaper rates. Automation on the distribution side has helped with not having the "fat." Those off-peak hours are important for maintenance (and construction.) I don't know, not my area, but I would look at what running a transformer at a higher load for more hours a day is going to do to the life of that transformer. Utilities are going to need engineers to design, build and operate system additions. Last time I checked we were not turning out new engineers at a good rate and new engineers were not knocking down the doors of electric utilities. I have been completely retired for over five years now, and I am still getting calls wanting me to come back to work because they can't find people. One final point, Norway's scaling problem is not quite the same. I think the absolute numbers, not just the ratios or percentages, do make a difference too. I will close by saying, that you are right, it can be done. And I say it must be done. I just think there is a little more to it.
Not a problem, just hire a bunch of Journalism or Psychology majors who have minored in Woman's Studies. They are still looking for work anyhow.
I agree we can do it and it has to be done. I agree with your comment. I think our grid needs to be upgraded long before electric cars are the norm.
Build nuclear power stations. They are safe, clean and combined with an upgraded grid will help.
@@CountryCraziness there is a lot of anti nuclear power people out there. They seem to believe wind and solar can do it all. Nuclear power is a viable option when the wind isn't blowing and sun aren't shining.
I believe MIT is close to getting a nuclear fusion to becoming a reality.
Agreed, a higher average load will affect life of components so new components will need to be re-designed to higher standards. The great news is we do have some time and it will slowly work itself out. It will take a couple decades to scale battery production to the extent that 100% new vehicles are EVs, so even doubling his calculation of 6.5 years to 13 years will be fine. Home and Grid batteries will help equalize the load and will be cheaper than peaker plant construction/running costs and major plant long term maintenance. They will also react quicker and be smarter in distribution.
In my neighborhood each pad mount transformer feeds four houses. The transformer cannot handle an additional 8 Type II chargers. It's OK if one person gets an electric car. A lot has to be figured out before we can all adopt the new tech. You can't just "pass a law".
A new law of physics, like "everything is possible if you wish enough," would do it.
@@flagmichael politicians are playing to peoples emotions… they act like the only reason way things are is because the people of won’t let me. “But when I get in power, I will change these arbitrary rules. “
there are peak hours, the cars can charge during non peak hours. If you need to charge now then use a quick charger
Kevin here dropping some simple logic and real world situations.
@@pleasedontwatchthese9593 Charging cars make whatever time they are charging peak hours. THis idea of just charge them at night is not well thought out.
Love your videos, and I'm not against evs. However, your second argument about the local grid and residential charging states that it is based on one vehicle per household. I don't know the number, but I bet the average American household has at least 2 vehicles. So wouldn't this multiply your calculations by at least 200%? Also, it would be nice to hear the avg cost per KWh, ang how much it would cost people to charge 2 or 3 cars. Finally, having experience in nuclear power generation, I think a lot of your assumptions may be a little off. energy production has indeed increased since 1960, but the transmission grid have seen very.little upgrades and is showing it's age. That infrastructure would def need to be upgraded.
Cars per household is important, but not so much. What matters is the number of cars existing. As for charging while home, I don't see it as much as a problem. Your point is a bit like saying "what if I drive my 2 cars to a gas station ? wouldn't it be more difficult to refuel ?"
--> YEs of course, but why would you do that ?
you can decide when to charge (EV) your car. IF it really creates a problem.
I don't know about USA but in Europe we have elecriticy contracts that have different costs depending on the charging hour (example: you pay 5 times less if you charge at night). Those contracts will evolve depending on the grid and demands.
So you can always adapt.
It's not black and white of course: if you're working all day, you need to charge your car at night. IF it needs charging (with a higher autonomy, you can wait, and maybe charge it during the weekend at day light for example).
There is a lot of moving parts.
Point is electricity is NOT fuel. => if ALL EV charge at the same time, it IS an issue. But that wont' happen. If they charge at different time, the weight on the grid is way less.
For Fuel, it is different.
What does the gridd have anything to do with it. Just build some overunity homopolar motor generator n-machine(Bruce Depalma). or a T Henry Moray plasma machine Edwin grey pulsed discharge 2 stroke powered motor. there are many more but all tap the aetheric vacuum ZPE energy wich has 10^94 grams/cc electromagnetic energy density. Moray B Kings books descibes all this and Tom bearden is well versed in ZPE energy.All these A ZPE powered electromagnetic sytems will give much more energy and HP then what were led to belief. I dont see what the obsession of a grid for all this stuff.
Great idea… make US 100% dependent upon EVs…. Don’t improve our grid capabilities/capacities, AND do nothing to improve our grids ability to resist cyber/EMP/solar flare/mechanical attacks… what does this do? Very minimally affects anything in a positive way AND makes us even more vulnerable to throw us back to the Middle Ages when the elites truly ruled the peasants…. Not to mention more dependency on questionable foreign powers for things like the batteries necessary to carry out this plan….Nice, we’ll thought-out plan…if that is your idea of a good idea….
When someone sits down and actually contemplates ALL of the issues EVs really have to overcome, the answer is: By all means, continue the research on improving ALL technologies we use for energy (both current AND those that are on the drawing board) fix the weaknesses of the grid, and gradually move toward the newer/better energy/technologies as they become truly feasible…. And before you use the flamethrower on my post here, please consider the environmental impact that its use will have on climate change…😬😬😬
fwiw, here's my math. admittedly an extreme example. but it is my situation. Oklahoma resident. Presently we average ~30miles/day. our most used vehicle is a 2001 V8 Sequoia. 12.6mpg city/16.3mpg hwy. Let's call it 14mpg average. Right this instant we pay ~$3.3/gal for regular. So... (30days) * (30 miles/day) / (14mpg) * (3.30 $/gal) = $212.14 per month. A Model Y get's ~3.1 mi/kWh. (way easier units than the 111-129 MPGe). Variable rate EV plans in my area are $0.197/kWh peak hours and $0.026/kWh 11pm to 6am. Soo... if I could successfully only trickle charge from 11pm to 6am then: (30days) * (30 miles/day) / (3.1 mi/kWh) * (0.026 $/kWh) = $7.55 per month.
edit, 3mos later: in the Oklahoma heat and our driving style we get like 2.9 to 3.3 mi/kWh. not the 3.5 originally stated.
@@paulbeinke7242Your overnight electric is 2.6 cents per kw?
Appreciate the info, you're a good explainer.
As a California resident, I fear the day that CA mandates EVs for everyone here, because we are closing plants and importing power already, and rates are only climbing. Not to mention the "aging infrastructure" and the problems caused by that, other than the spectacular seasonal wildfires. CA energy demand is currently "unsustainable" but rather than build more base line power plants, they are increasing the power they buy from other states.
As for "predictable" solutions, the only things in CA that is predictable, are vast cost overruns, corruption and delays.
As a fellow Ca resident, I agree.
AZ thanks you for your business!!
As Californians. To solve a lot of our problems we need to do one simple thing. ... take Gavin Newsom and put him on the moon far far away. He is a socialist corrupt scumbag. He must go soon
We are in a similar situation in Portugal, without any baseline sources like Nuclear, only Natural Gas as a dispatchable, and increasing reliance on the intermittent RES and on Imported energy from the rest of Europe.... Just like California...More info in my comment above
For a start you could revisit the early closure of the Diavolo-Canyon NPP
Great video. Thanks for creating this.
One big difference between 1960-2000 compared to today is the “war” on coal and nuclear. It was much easier to build either type of powerplant in 1960 or even 1980 than it is today.
Michigan has closed at least 15 coal plants since 2015 and on track to close 10 more by 2025.
Plus we just idled a nuclear plant.
We’re losing lots of capacity and not replacing it.
Michigan should go hard into nuclear and hydro power production, and with all the people out there cutting out their production and not building new power sources, Michigan should take advantage of the situation while ensuring our own stability. Use the state's official powers to safely streamline and highly cost-effectively install many new high-capacity plants.
@@cobaltclass. Michigan is flat. How are they going to get hydro power. You need mountains at least the size of the Ozarks to build resovoirs. But then you're flooding entire towns and hundreds of square miles. Imagine the environmental impact. To save the planet we'll destroy the environment.
@@cobaltclass. Hydro is great but they are tearing down dams because of the environmental harm they are doing! Nobody wants nuclear in their backyards even though they are very safe.
@@cobaltclass. So where would put a dam on the The Detroit river? Somewhere on the St Clair river? You do realize ocean going ships also use the Duluth / Atlantic route along the St Lawrence Seaway?
When I approached a flock of No nukes, No guns, numb breasted, the air is being poisoned all that, hens with this. The decisions you make today will decide whether your grandchildren and great grandchildren will A. Glow in the dark. B. Starve to death. C. Freeze to death. You would have thought they all just laid eggs.
That was in 1975. Having college level education in electricity, electronics, mechanical engineering, chemistry and biosciences sucks. As for Norway it is as about as big as New Mexico. 2.5 million people live in New Mexico. 5 million live in Norway. Norway has around 50 hydro power stations. Just guessing about 50% generate more than or equal to 250 Mega watts.
Michigan I think has one or two 30 Megawatt hydro stations. The rest are smaller and most are in the UP.
And with Biden's war on domestic energy production the problem will be even worse...
"No problem, we just need 30% more power" would be much more convincing if California and New York were not having trouble serving their current needs.
Ny has no power issues
Your calculations left out an obvious factor: most families here in Florida have a minimum of 2 cars and run A/C round the clock about 75-80% of the year. I presume Arizona, Texas, California and parts of other states do the same. Therefore your estimate of per household usage of energy needs to be doubled plus. Also, you did not address the issues of EV trucking, railroad, busses, and taxi's. I have yet to hear how transcontinental flight, much less international flight is going to work as all electric! So far I've only seen one ultra-light aircraft powered by batteries. It could carry only the pilot, and had a range of 2 hours. Do you propose returning to sailing ships for international travel?
@@gregolusczak3495 hydrogen fuel cell makes more sense than EV semis
It hurts TX too in that a lot of "new arrivals" are from CA & NY, thus putting more of a burden on an already overwhelmed system.
The result will be Disaster yet again.
The cold weather "occasions" are occurring with more frequency seemingly. Does anybody have TX weather data proving Brutal cold snaps are happening more frequently?
You can thank overregulation for that one.
I live in North Carolina and we now have two EVs. We only charge between 1 AM and 6 AM during the discount period which is around 6 cents per kWH. This is also a very low demand period for electricity so I doubt if we are hardly noticeable in the grand scheme of things. It definitely hasn't been very noticeable in our monthly bill and we're saving a ton vs the gasoline we used to buy every month. Also we only need to charge two to three times per week for each vehicle because our daily commutes are not that far. If we were the average household scenario, would it really be 30% more needed or is this worse case that you are talking? Another factor (although I'm not sure how big), if we didn't have to pump, refine or manufacture as much petroleum, wouldn't this be a sizable return back to the grid since it does require electricity?
Great video. I have discussed this roughly. Living in Los Angeles we see when there is an unusual heat wave in the summer and everyone is using air conditioners, it often overloads the whole grid system, then try to imagine all those same
people plugging in their car while the air conditioner is on. It will definitely be a big and expensive up grade to make electric cars feasible. I'm a retired electrician and I just connected a 40 amp circuit for some one in my apartment building for a car charger. There is definitely not enough electricity in this building for even half the tenants to have EVs.
You charge evs at night when demand is low
While we do have to upgrade the electric system in the US, the data in this video are WAY off. It is primarily fear mongering
Pretty simple solution. Get solar plus battery backup. In tesla's configurator, my 2000 sq ft house would cost $12,000 after incentives which with $150 power bill pays for itself in 7 years. I'm not sure why more people don't do this but in a few years it will get even cheaper maybe even below 5 years payback period.
We need to find a way to cool our homes cheaper as well as heat our homes cheaper. We have increased the use of insulation. How ever we need air exchange
@@kevinoneill41 would need lots of new Nuclear reactors , only 20 years to build one
We installed an EV charging circuit controlled by the power company. The circuit relay is only on from 10pm - 7am, but the rate is only 3c/KwH. Costs just under $2 to fully charge the Bolt.
That is pretty amazing actually and a good solution for the time being. Thanks for sharing that.
My local electric co-op offers me 250kwhs monthly of free electricity upon proof of owning an electric vehicle.
As long as you charge it between 11pm-7am.
Just did the same here in tampa to take advantage of time of use, we are getting 6c/kwh. In my model 3, thats close to 1.5c/mile. My girlfriends Civic, for example, at 35mpg and $2.50 in gas per gallon nearly 5x that cost (7.2c/mile in fuel). Even compared to a cheap, good mileage car I'm saving over $1,100 per year in fuel alone.
2c/kWh! In Adelaide they are paying > $0.40AUD/kWh
@@peted3637 Wow, that's a lot. I know everything in AUS is generally more expensive, but dang. Our normal rate is 10.5c, which is still only ~$7 to fully recharge. My Camry costs ~$18 to go that same distance. At 30k mi/yr that really adds up.
@@andrewt9204 It's 11c per kWh here in Colorado. It's a flat rate though so no benefits or costs to charging whenever I need to.
My Bolt's about 3c per mile and my old Subaru was about 10c per mile.
I'm in Ontario Canada. We already have peak and off-peak hydro charges. It's a nightmare. 5X the charge for on peak times...You know when you want to use it....Or stay up late just to save some money. If the answer is to further capitalize energy, than we're all going to pay much more than we think.
Keep the great vids coming. Stay Happy an Healthy.
My EV the Chevy Bolt, which is cheap and crappy (although efficient) is programmable for charging for different rates.
I'm sure other cars have this and more.
So, no need to stay up late, just plug your car in and tell it tostart charging when rates go down and it will all be ok.
Why do you stay up? Use scheduling at nigjt
@@catinthehat5140 I don't have a machine to change laundry, cook things on my electric stove, etc. It's the domestic tasks that you can save $ with. Microwave, electric stove and dryer can use lot of energy. That's one of the reasons why there's a spike in usage around dinner time.
Stay Happy and Healthy.
Heres a business idea for someone, build a smart switch that turns your car charger on when rates are the lowest part of the day.
5x cheap is still cheap. In California we have expensive and 2.5 x expensive power. We have hydro but you have to carry the water back up the hill in buckets to maintain flow. And those people are well paid, They use donkeys. Cheaters.
Bit of a slight-of-hand going on with the rate of electricity increase calculations here. From 1960 to 2000, we went from generating (relatively) small amounts of electricity to generating huge amounts of electricity. Since you're starting with a small number, the percent increase is going to be large as a matter of course. But, now that we're starting with a large number, subsequent percent increases only come from massive absolute increases. By analogy, if I do one pushup on day one and 10 on day two, I've increased the number I've done by 1000%. However, if I did 20 push-ups on day 3, I would only have increased my total by 100%..
Great point. Assuming linear rate of increments is unrealistic. But it certainly aids the persuasion of the viewpoint does it not.
There are also a lot of variables like how was the grid built for and how much upgrades have been done. For all we know, the electrical system may have been placed for a certain maximum of electrical use and hasn’t reached yet. You can only transport so much electricity at once, so even if there is enough electric to go around, can the grid move it around fast enough to everyone so here are no disruptions?
Hey man, you are a great teacher bro. Out of all the Engineering channels out there, you seem to be able to explain it in ways that are more understandable. It is very appreciated and I am glad you have been more active lately
Happy to hear it, thanks for watching!
@@EngineeringExplained Long time watcher...First time commenter...Love the channel
Besides explaining it so nicely, he also seems to be a really nice guy to be friends with.
To go camping, fishing and hiking.
@@BubblesTheCat1 The willingness to share his knowledge speaks volumes about his character...His compensation will be far greater than any amount of $$$ in the end...💯
I agree, this channel is brilliant, engineering explained for dummies. Keep up the good work fella👍🏾
Important information like this requires the whiteboard
amen to that
Jason could use a whiteboard in his Tesla since it can pilot it self. However I think he really enjoys driving.
He should mount a camera on the hood and write on his windshield in reverse like they do on submarines
agreed
Just think of how much electricity could have been saved by recording this at home.
One thing that never gets discussed - how will government TAX electric car energy to make up for the loss of gasoline taxes?
Tax on electricity or expensive chargers
increase tire tax. ALL motor vehicles use tires
Many states are doing it based on vehicle registration fees, no idea if that's sustainable or not
Saskatchewan just instituted a $150 per year extra when u register to compensate for lost gas tax in ev's
Probably mileage ontop of registration
I just found this channel and subscribed immediately. Not because of the solid content, or the solid data, or even the fact he was able to bust out math equations on the top of his head. But because of all of the above and he was able to do it so casually while going for a Sunday drive without batting an eye lid or missing a word.
Yes, same thoughts, I figured there is no way he has a prompter here, he is a very intelligent young guy rattling all this stuff out of his head while doing a nice country drive, and makes very interesting points also.
Green Screen ... :)
@@luckyguy600 🤣
I have driven this exact drive 100’s of times in my EV’s and 🏍 motorcycles.
I was on the Board of the OEVA Oregon Electric Vehicle 🚗 Association and remember this EV enthusiast from then.
Our conversations were on this topic to the point we could all share the numbers by memorization
I have driven this exact drive 100’s of times in my EV’s and 🏍 motorcycles.
I was on the Board of the OEVA Oregon Electric Vehicle 🚗 Association and remember this EV enthusiast from then.
Our conversations were on this topic to the point we could all share the numbers by memorization
Thank you for putting out actual quality information on a topic like this rather than a 30 second rant with no research. It's beyond helpful!
I'm curious to know how that energy will be generated. From the 1960s to 2000s no one was thinking about climate change, so nothing was stopping the country from using coal or natural gas, which is a fairly easy addition, especially in comparison with renewables. Now, though, the addition would have to be in clean energy, and adding to that there will be pressure to retire some 90% of non-renewable energy currently at work in the US. In other words, I think we need something serious in terms of a technological breakthrough to aid this transition.
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE
So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes.
DOUBLE the power plants capacity.
DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines.
But all transportation electric, say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS,
TRIPLE poles and wires,
TRIPLE main grid.
Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. For the long trip.
The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority.
The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV.
The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour.
The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money.
Every building is connected to the grid.
Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid.
Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies.
Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply.
Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm.
Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH .
Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm.
For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades.
And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years.
Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required.
Insurance will not be available.
If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min,
The USA is the biggest target in the world.
Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter.
Military costs increase massively and national budgets.
ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs.
75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades.
Think, think, think 🤔
ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , and just live in a fantasy.
Yeah, it's called nuclear.
@@douglasmount188 if only the USA went totally nuclear.
The world's CO2 may change a little but would not go to zero.
So what is the point?
@@stephenbrickwood1602 The point is nuclear is safer, easier to scale, cheaper to build, and less polluting.
@@sgartner And every country in the world with Nuclear industries????
In Sweden where it´s pretty cold at the moment, goverment has actually told us to not run the vacuum cleaner and other power hungry stuff. In the same time they decommisionned a nuclear power plant. Aaaand they use heavy tax on ICE cars to make us buy electric cars. It´s a bit worrying.
All the numbers can make sense, but the governments don't make decisions based on pure numbers.
What's "pretty cold" in Sweden? Below the boiling point of nitrogen?
Good you voted for this nonsense.
Some problems with your analysis:
1. Not only do we need to increase the amount of power we produce by (your estimate) 30%, we also have to replace most of the power plants we have now with green power plants if EVs are to fulfill their purpose. (The problem will be substantially higher in some regions.) So we need to essentially rebuild the entire power generating infrastructure in the USA if we are going to address the green house emissions and so far that isn't in the plans.
2. You're assuming every household has only one electric vehicle. Most families will have two, just as most households have two gas-powered cars. This will double your estimate as to the amount of power being drawn from each household.
3. As you say, power grids are already forced into blackouts during peak times in the summer due to air conditioner because we don't have to power generating capacity to deal with the demand we currently have. Flattening the curve will help. But we will still need major investments to upgrade the grid to have a aggregate load that will be nearly twice the current load.
4. How long will it take for growing population to push the grid beyond its limits when we all adopt EVs and flatten the load? Then at some point the burgeoning population will cause the grid to be above its limits most of the time. Again, we will need substantial investments to avoid the problem.
5. You mention power charging issues for apartment complexes and so on, and those aren't trivial to solve. Again, the costs of getting the power stations to plus the long charging times can't be glossed over.
The costs of the new and replacement power sources and the grid upgrades must be put into the plan or consumer sticker shock will cause a revolt against the technology.
Thank you for addressing this! Every time I talk about electric cars, the grid is one of the first things people want to talk about. I'll be sharing this video a lot haha. Loved the air conditioning example too!
It definitely could work in some areas but realistically it’s a long shot in major cities and rural areas
@@bradenmchenry995 You are wrong! Watch the video for fucks sake!
@@damijanapopotnik8081 I did watch the video bro
If you watched the video he goes into the adoption rates and off setting peak charging loads to balance the grid. This is not an unpredictable/insurmountable issue. "Electrics" are just better. The end.
Lol, 4 % increase every year, so for cars we just hold all our power consumption and only use that 4 % increase in production for cars, and that's the only one arguement that is just bull, dont have the time to type all,
Hi, I live in Norway. We currently have a lot of EVs on the road and a very cold winter, which means a lot more expensive electricity (about 7 to 10 times more expensive than in summer). This hasn't created an energy problem, but a power problem. Some areas in our country simply don't have enough power for new power hungry industries to establish themselves because it would overload the grid. Another reason for this is because we decided to electrify our oil platforms, which is silly since we could just burn natural gas from the fields themselves, but now it's just exported and burned abroad. And sure, if you change all petrol cars into EVs, you'll need more energy and power. But you'll also shut down some refineries and other petroleum industry infrastructure that consumes a lot of electricity. That will mitigate some of the problems. There's also an issue with too much power consumption in the morning and afternoon as you mentioned, so we need a smarter grid where some power can be used at night instead.
why would refineries use much electricity and why would anyone charge in the morning or afternoon if electricity is cheapest at night?
but if everyone is charging by night, it's not cheap anymore....
7x more expensive at winter is just mind blowing, it's almost as all lakes you have are frozen and then you have almost no power. and here's this american praising you....
Thanks Agent Smith "Hi, we are Norway. We are a massive fossil fuel producer, but we stay off our junk. Like all smart pushers."
@@ivok9846 the Norwegian lakes _are_ all frozen, but that doesn't stop the hydro plants from working. - Yes, the price fluctuations are a bit crazy, but this January really is exceptional in that regard. Normally, Norwegian electricity is hardly more expensive than in the US, and in spring and summer it's actually much cheaper.
Yep, some times one fix is not a fix at all but just pushing it down the line.
@@leftaroundabout Hi, where are you getting your prices? Norwegian electric prices are about double of that in America. You can't just look st the cost of a kilowatt, and ingnore the "net" cost. The prices in America is power plus net, here the only talk about the power price while ignoring the net.
We're having huge grid problems up here in the Yukon and the utility company isn't allowing customers to get EV chargers for that exact reason.
Betcha snow storms don't help
We can't even handle ac units in calgary for the 2 hot days of the year.
You don’t need permission. Just put a dryer outlet in your garage or by the driveway, and plug in a portable EVSE. The power company won’t ever know what you’re using it for.
@@RealBenAnderson i charged two cars on single 120v outlet for a a year and was fine. 240v EVSE chargers are more comfort product than necessity
And yet the YT government is installing multiple EV stations - without charging for their use. Makes all the sense in the world doesnt it?
If everyone ran an AC every day for 4 extra hours than they normally do, I'm not sure the grid could take it The key phrase there is "more than they normally do" - a 50% increase in power usage for all citizens is significant.
The total amount of power used is not the issue. More power demand than supply is. If those 4 extra hours are during the low demand phase at night, the grid would have no issues. And since people running there AC actually is causing the highest point in demand, rznning them longer doesn't increase peak demand, just the average.
Depends on if you are topping off and use a low charge rate overnight vs drive the entire capacity of the battery and need fast charging for high daily use.
*One average home A/C unit (3-4KW) is just a fraction of what a fast charger demands (20+KW)*
You could turn on your AC +Water Heater, + Clothes Dryer + your OVEN to maybe draw 80 amps at 230VAC to equal a fast charger (that is just 20KW). High end fast charging is well above that rate.
Now imagine all the sudden that 30% to 50% of your neighbors did that at the same time.
The power grid wasn't built for that. Not in the residential areas.
@@PsalmFourteenOne Assuming they increased the power generation capacity by 30% so that everyone could have their electric cars. They'd need to implement a forced schedule on when people are allowed to charge their cars which isn't practical for most people. There's going to be days where you take that extra long trip and get screwed because it's "not your turn" to charge your car. It's just going to become chaos.
@TheMagache Exactly.
This is not about the environment. If is about control.
Which is why the hate self sufficient off grid homes
@@PsalmFourteenOne precisely what they want. They want you locked down unable to charge your car and unable to leave
"You want more energy, they'll sell it to you. I don't think that is an issue." Jason has apparently never heard of California.
He's talking about the United States, not California, wherever that is.
California produces too much electricity, they have to pay Nevada to take some off their hands. Most of CA's power outages are because PG&E find it cheaper to just shut off people's power when it's windy or hot and dry so they don't spark another fire rather than updating their powerlines.
CA screwed up by building so much generation without enough storage, but at least some of the blame lies upon their for profit power company.
Hi
@@visionsofpromise ello
5:45
So glad the population is going down
The 4%/year increase in grid capacity since the 60s is an average that mostly came from coal/nuclear/hyrdro/gas power generation systems. Would be interesting to see how much of the increase has come from wind & solar in the recent years.
yell you already know rolling blackout in california and texas :D
Caused in TX by an unfettered 'free' market system
I wouldn't put hydro/nuclear on the same level as coal/gas. Their respective environmental impact is really different (nuclear being the cleanest, followed by hydro and wind). Solar is theoretically clean, but producing solar panels and recycling them when they' re old can have a big environmental impact.
@@MrGardenofeden well hydro is clean on case of pollution but top built it it kills natural habitats like crazy, fish and other water animal homes and stop their migration... so effectively decimate them... just like wind turbines do with birds
@@maszkalman3676 I don't think there is an energy source which is truly zero impact. What we can do is pick the ones with the smallest one
Can you imagine all the extension cables coming out of the apartment buildings in NYC
yeah, that a big problem. As car tech gets better and fast charging get to 10mins for a fill up, That's never going to be available at home. so we are still going to be stuck fast charging at "gas stations" and then making a profit on the electricity.
Genuinely laughed out loud. 1,000 foot extension cables the next shortage on Amazon!
In the UK they have started to install in some council chargers on the street using the current street light network or mains power network.
In Norway they’ve piggybacked off the electrical wiring for street lights and such to provide curbside charging. Are Americans clever enough for that kind of solution?
@@mrfr87 That's clever. So, one can charge your car up while stuck in traffic. 😊
And.... See California as an example on how NOT to force people into EV's.
If you are going to tell people to switch, you need to make sure the infrastructure to support it... is in place..
Or, like CA, you tell people to not charge their cars or use AC because the power grid can't handle it.
So over 40 years our power grew 500% from .76Trillion KW to 3.8 Trillion KW but then grew only 8% over the next 20 years from 3.8 Trillion KW to 4.1 Trillion KW while stressing the grid to its limit and watching the cost of power explode (pun intended) With a growth rate of well under 1% over the last 20 years what would you expect a realistic growth rate to be over the next 20 years? And I'd point out that the point out that the growth rate between 1960 and 2000 was due in large part to the adoption of nuclear power. I'm sorry but you won't see that kind of large growth rate in the future if you're counting on wind and solar...
"It's something that's predictable"
*Texas made this statement not age well in less than a week*
I know its when they declared the Titanic the unsinkable ship before the maiden voyage.
Texas is having once-a-century weather conditions. Power lines break, roads are impassable. Texas didn't have good backup systems, nor can they import energy through their grid.
i mean it kinda was though, texas was hit with a slightly less cold snap in 2011 that froze oil and shut down plants but they refused to weatherize their power lines or bury water lines below the frost line
@@MySuperman112 You are absolutely correct! Utilities never fix their reliability unless made to do so. Many utilities even claim they're allocating funds to bury power lines but never do.
@@justsomeguy934 All true but it's worth noting that the Pacific Northwest has experienced literally dozens of "once-in-a-century" floods over the last couple of decades. Along with several "once-in-five-century" floods. Global climate change makes such labels rather laughable.
Good video! One aspect I missed is the question how we would produce the extra 30% of electric power. Back in the 1960s, adding more coal or even nuclear plants would be not too difficult. Assuming we want to use clean energy now, and simultaneously replace polluting power plants with clean ones, the job is much more difficult. Not impossible of course, but I fear more complicated than you suggest.
@@ch4.hayabusa While not as bad as coal, they still pollute quite a bit. In the Netherlands, we're scaling down gas mining because this is causing earthquakes (and thereby damage to houses etc). So not ideal from that angle either.
It’s likely 2years to meet demand , as demand for EVs go up gas car demand drops .
The amount of gas that needs to be extracted ,refined , shipped , transported will significantly drop electricity usage worldwide.
Is this agreeable?
California has been running a power deficit for years even with consumers adding power via solar sell back. That's been predictable but not fixable.
....and California is currently asking EV owners NOT to charge their cars...
Welcome to dystopia! Say goodbye to the free will of driving your car!
No, it is not fixable. It's all part of the plan.
Enter thorium salt reactors...
Just buy a gasoline powered car... my solution to the problem lol 😂
You also have to consider that during this time of 1960-2000, was when we were ramping up nuclear power and hydroelectric electrification. So, it was easy to see how we ramped up. Using wind or solar to create the equivalent power output will not be possible
Each home + 2 EV is 200% power increase, DOUBLE
So DOUBLE the poles and wires to the streets and homes.
DOUBLE the power plants capacity.
DOUBLE the size of the main grid transmission lines.
But all transportation electric, say TRIPLE POWER PLANTS,
TRIPLE poles and wires,
TRIPLE main grid.
Now EV batteries are huge, 100kwh soon. For the long trip.
The Daily drive is only 7kwh for the majority.
The automatic plug in gizmo will be the killer invention for the EV.
The EV can be plugged in 24/7, except for the daily drive or rush hour.
The EV can trade power and stability with the grid for money.
Every building is connected to the grid.
Every rooftop with solar pv can be connected to the grid.
Petroleum is a strategic military reserve asset for war fighting and emergencies.
Solar and renewable energy is dramatically improving energy supply.
Distributed power supply from the ends of the grid would mean the existing grid would not need to expand. $2million / klm.
Power Plants world not need to expand at $2BILLION EACH .
Poles and wires would not have to expand at $????/ klm.
For concentrated power supply then nuclear power plants at $billions and billions and billions . And decades and decades and decades.
And massive financial burden for 60 to 100years.
Too expensive to ever turn off before ROI and profits. Government guarantee profit would be required.
Insurance will not be available.
If CO2 reduction by the world then every country will have nuclear industries . 100,000 min,
The USA is the biggest target in the world.
Nuclear weapons and nuclear winter.
Military costs increase massively and national budgets.
ALL ENGINEERS MUST THINK ABOUT ALL COSTS INCLUDING EXTERNAL COSTS, climate destabilisation, military costs, distribution costs, generation costs, nuclear winter costs.
75 years of nuclear non proliferation WAS the biggest thing for decades.
Think, think, think 🤔
ANYBODY CAN HALF THINK , just live in a fantasy.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 Good points. But also take into account the giant amount of electricity that's actually required to run a gasoline car, from the well to the pump. You have pump jacks that pump the oil out of the ground, that use something like 30,000 kw/hr per month for ONE. Then several gigawatt hours per year just for ONE medium sized oil refinery. Each gas station uses a crapload of power running all those high powered lights, pumps, convenience store etc. It's quite a bit. The real answer I think that's needed is to NOT destroy all the old power plants. Shut them down, and maybe dismantle the coal side of things. But we need to hurry up and invent a fusion power reactor. Then that can be installed in existing coal power plants, to provide superheated steam to the existing turbines. In many of the coal plants the steam turbines and generators and switchyard gear is still in good shape, all that's needed is to replace the source of steam with something less wasteful than burning up gas/coal.
@@brnmcc01 yep good thinking
I didn't know the things you brought up. Thank you.
We need real life facts.
I wish I could cut and paste your input.
The Fusion technology is still a distant furfy, climate destabilisation is the point even the nuclear promoters agree on.
Rooftop solar PV systems as every building is connected to the grid.
Every EV is near a building day and night.
There are 13million EV today, 100,000 were predicted by todate.
Every one is busy with life and do not have my background, I am free of corporate constraints and daily pressures.
I have grandchildren and see a lot of vested interests and political distortion.
Kodak film company invented the digital camera, things change if not constrained by vested interests, big vested interests.
@@brnmcc01 existing power plants do have a role to play.
But if the coming renewable technology kills its cash flow it will fight back.
Number one rule of business is maximum profit, actually by law.
The transition is a complex problem.
I just glossed over and looked at the biggest factors including climate destabilisation ! !
@@brnmcc01 Except most oil is imported so a big chunk of that generation is not load on the grid in the area where the gasoline car is used
Amazing video. I get it but living in LA and having rolling blackouts every year currently puts my faith really low in how well this is all going to play out.
The rolling blackouts happen in the daytime, right? LA needs to have more people install rooftop solar, especially on west-facing roofs. LA also needs more large stationary batteries to let some of the daytime solar electric production be used in the first few hours after sundown.
And it's actually going to get worse. CA is going to shut down their last nuclear plant in a few years, that will have a huge impact, we already are finding out that windmill and solar farms are great when you have wind and sunny days, when you have little wind and cloudy days we have the blackouts as we saw this last summer. CA also has many con-gen plants sitting idle due to environmentalist's, will they allow production from them, remains to be seen.
this is why when the wife said she wanted an EV I got her a prius prime instead not much distance but she mostly uses electric and we have gas for road trips and when we forget to charge etc
@@calamityjean1525 there Are people getting home battery backup and making money with it.
If it worked in Florida I'd do it too.
@@calamityjean1525 In other words: "LA needs more people to have........................expensive equipment that the majority of the LA population can't afford"
Here in California they are going to outlaw natural gas fired furnaces starting next year. Also, I believe all new homes here are required to be completely electric with no natural gas appliances at all. That is when things are going to get interesting.
Especially considering Cali already has grid crisis situations with the demand for power consumption now reaching higher than the energy being produced now lol.
Never happen at hospitals, schools etc. Its BS.
No, here in CA, gas furnaces will NOT be outlawed next year. People who have gas furnaces can continue to use them. However, it looks as though using gas will be outlawed in NEW buildings and new buildings will not be provided with gas. But until the electricity supply becomes more reliable, I see that as unreasonable. It would even be impossible to have a natural gas generator for emergency power.
Although CA has been very forward looking and ahead of the rest of the country in many areas, there have been serious mistakes. One of the mistakes was shutting down nuclear plants for no good reason. The nuclear plants were already paid for and were generating cheap carbon free power.
I myself have a heat pump which works quite well and is not unduly expensive to operate here in the desert.
@@awesomegaming8617 True, and largely because of closing down nuclear plants. That was a big mistake.
And Here in L.A they have to do rolling blackouts because too many people had their A/C on. So unless they fix the power grid, this whole “push for EV everything” is doa.
You are missing subtracting the energy used for refining and transport of the fossil fuels being replaced. That is a significant draw on the grid. We will still need refineries for other products that don’t get burned, but the elimination of that energy being used for liquid fuel production should count in as well.
also EV's can also function as energy storage for the grid when they arent in use. its a concept called "the internet of things" and there are plenty of yt videos on it if you're interested
@@MySuperman112 if you're looking at EVs working as a battery to support the grid its known as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G).
There are also concepts for Vehicle-to-Building (V2B) where the car provides power to a house or office block.
its simple we just need to build a dyson sphere.
After you finish the video you'll see the problem is in energy distribution not in energy production
I think it's crazy to try to force people into ev do to the fact it takes a period time fully charge them, you aren't telling babies not to be calm. I don't think it's good at all.
Or at least a dyson swarm, baby steps!
We still don't have an efficient energy distribution system.
And then live on the dyson sphere
At this point I think the safest bet is to get a plug in electric hybrid. If anything goes wrong along the way you still have options.
Honestly I feel like a lot of plug-in hybrids are just great to get awesome parking spaces. I see people abusing this all the time and leaving Chevy Volts at the charging stations even after they're finished charging.
If you have an EV and solar, you are much better off. You can’t build a gasoline refinery at your house.
@@rob1andrews
I used to be able to make biodiesel.
100% renewable, from waste fluid (fryer oil).
Why did I stop?
New diesels can't handle it.
Why?
Environmental controls limit use to about 20%.
Why?
Again.
Recycling a renewable resource isn't green enough?
Idiots making decisions.
I once could safely make and store a renewable resource at my home. The side stream (glycerol) was composable or could could be sold off for soap products.
Again.
Hybrids are pointless, you're maintaining two separate systems in one car it's like having two cars in one. Double the cost double the weight. It's not a good solution. Full electric or nothing.
@@chrisdigital Just wait and see what happens in the near future. Electric cars charge at a much higher draw than most houses, some fast charging systems draw many more times what the average home does. There's going to be a point where the grid can't support it. If you go full electric you better go full solar and don't expect to be able to go on long trips because the infrastructure isn't going to be there.
What a great and informative video! Another point to be made is that, along with the additional electrical usage, there will be a corresponding decrease in gas usage. Lots of large refineries also have power generation, so they can use the reduction in refining to provide more power.
Another factor that people in cooler regions will need to contend with is that E-vehicles don't fully defrost as combustion vehicles do. The part that bugs me most of all about a switch to EV though is the electronics that can now be overridden/updated remotely. Imagine just like your cell phone the manufacturers started limiting the performance of your phone's battery after a year, and car manufacturers make things not work as well in the car after the warrenty, or they disable features for used vehicles. On top of that, the ability of an entity to remotely disable your property and ability to travel is VERY concerning.
One other problem I foresee is when software(like phone apps, or video games) no longer works because they cannot connect to the internet so they no longer start. This is already a problem with some software not working on new vehicles when there is no internet. Additionally, some companies have accidentally bricked(disabled) their products by updating them with faulty software (Electrolux Accidentally Bricks Thousands of Microwaves With OTA Update).
An example of that is recently John Deer tractor was able to remotely disable stolen tractors in Ukraine over the internet. That was a good use for that but imagine that ability being abused later by governments or hackers.
Actually the opposite is happening at Tesla. There cars functionality has improved overall throughout the past decade. The batteries in these vehicles, properly cared for should last more than a million miles. They are also creating facilities to repurpose the raw materials from old batteries to be used in new ones. This should also decrease the raw materials needed moving forward. Personally the only way I see the grid in the US keeping up with demand is through nuclear in the northern states and solar in the southwestern states.
You make it sound like you can not disable the vehicles access to the internet which would keep them from accessing it would it not? I'm pretty sure I can shut off my Tesla from having internet access with a click of a button.
@@mrh3085 The company thats CEO is getting smeared relentlessly by corporate news. Thats good to hear about the million miles(does proper care mean stored in a garage at all times? whats that mean if you would eleborate), regarding a million miles, I dont know what that translates into years for a car that sits around alot vs a daily commuter?
@@jstar1000 I am not an insider or engineer at Tesla or any other EV company, nor do I own an EV, so I have no idea if they can remotely turn on the internet or not like a cell phone can be remotely turned on(thats why they made the batteries not removable - it really wasn't just because thinness or water resistence).
I'm very interested in the tech BUT... I'm extremely hesitant no matter how benevolent one company is to trust them all.
Additionally, I know some software stops working on other devices I own if they have not been updated for a long time. Somehow it knows(has a software timer im guessing) that if I have not connected this for a certiain amount of time it needs to be updated and wont work otherwise.
I have a new combustion vehicle with the high-end options that when used with smart phones force the connection and won't allow the connection to turn off( I have tried turning off WIFI and Bluetooth and they keep turning back on until I use VPN and then it breaks connection) and I would bet $ they send information back to some server somewhere without most users understanding what that means, and likely could use that connection to adjust things on the vehicle unbeknownst to the owner if they don't turn off the internet as you suggest.
@@mrh3085 Tesla has been deleting features for user car buyers of Tesla, insisting used buyers re-purchase options the original owner paid for.
Finally someone talking about what actually matters when it comes to EV's
Um, his conclusion of a net increase in grid demand is false as he failed to subtract the energy required to refine petroleum into gasoline. So much energy is used to extract, refine, transport and store gasoline that the impact on the grid is none.
@@justsomeguy934 Is 30% of American electricity used for gasoline production and transport?
@@wallybal1297 I'm not sure of your question. The electricity requirements to refine a single gallon of gasoline have an average estimate of 5 kW/h. Some estimates are much lower (.22 kW/h refinery only), some are much higher (8 kW/h well-to-wheel) with an industry average of 5 kW/h per gallon. Where are you assuming 30% of national energy production?
@@justsomeguy934 I may have misinterpreted you here. Are you implying that there will not be a net increase of electricity demand, or that it would be less than 30%?
@@wallybal1297 As the demand for gasoline falls as drivers switch to electric vehicles, so will the energy demand used to refine it. This wasn't included in the overall energy use calculation for drivers. It depends where the refinery gets its electricity from. If they burn their own fuel to run their own generator, then it won't affect the local grid either way.
Hamsters have large litters, I reckon we can scale up pretty fast.
What a lot of people don't realize is how many big operations out there need to go onto curtailment during days of high energy consumption. I have to run my workplace on our diesel generators all the time. Even in the winter, we have to run our boilers on fuel oil.
While I agree with a lot of the points you bring up, as an electric engineer I feel like you're being VERY VERY optimistic about our current power grid and setups. It can be done, and you're absolutely right, but a lot needs to be fixed and updated in the structure to support such changes, it's not really comparable to summer when people use their ACs because summer will go away and the grid have room stabilize again either with raising the cost so people use less, or with other ways. Considering that electric car influx of consumption would be basically permanent as people would their cars every day to go to work and do their daily routine it's not just planning to high and low consumption in different seasons, it's an huge increase in consumption while also keeping the consumption we already have.
As an electrical engineer, is there a time when the electrical grid is underutilized? Can the cars charge then? If so, no problem. Also oil refineries use a lot of electricity.
Considering the current OAT in North Dakota is about 12 below zero, wind chill about 25 below....the amperage draw running electric heat in a vehicle, the heating element itself plus the blower motor added to the heated seat and rear window, side mirror defoggers, I would guess that EV would make it about 10 to 15 miles before the batteries went dead.
@@northdakotaham1752 70kw will keep you toasty for a long time... the model Y also has a heat pump so probalby will heat decently for quite a long time.
@@davidbeppler3032 I again bring up the issue of not having enough renewable energy sources to power even half of the current amount we spend. With this weird anti-nuclear stance, countries like Germany and Japan are going *back* to coal. How the hell is getting rid of petrol cars any better, if the power generated is just going to be produced by burning oil (that for some reason just became a lot cheaper!), coal and natural gas?
Not to even mention the massive impact on the environment made by every single motor vehicle having to suddenly convert to using lithium based batteries. Where the hell is that going to come from? You have any idea how much destruction that would cause? Not to mention the pollution?
What about freight? The massive freight ship engines run on diesel. What about airplanes? One trans-Atlantic flight causes more damage to the environment than all the fuel consumed by all 22 Formula 1 cars during the whole season.
What about arctic areas? Or any areas where it gets cold enough to be freezing? Batteries deflate in the cold and operating range is reduced to almost nothing due to heating elements draining what little power is left.
"But we could just build a lot more solar panels and then cover like the Sahara with them or something"
Then what? In 25 years they're going to have to be replaced. Not to even mention how much that would cost, what about the billions of tonnes of toxic waste from the PV panels?
More dams? Ecosystems have already been irreparably destroyed because of hydroelectric dams.
Sea turbines don't produce enough energy. Neither to UTES systems.
Fission will just produce more waste. That is the least harmful option. Guess we could just shoot the barrels into the sun or something some day.
More funding on fusion! That's the ticket.
Hey man, you're just thinking about it the wrong way. The grid can handle the influx of load right now. All we have to give up is reliability.
The problem with the increased energy demand is where it’s going to come from. The government doesn’t like nuclear so it’s going to come from “dirty” sources like coal and gas. Then pile on how terrible mining is for the resources to manufacture the batteries and it’s bad on top of bad on top of bad.
I grew up in Iowa. Today, about 60% of Iowa's electric power comes from wind.
When the San Onofre nuclear plant unexpectedly closed in California, it took just 4 years for its entire output to be replaced with wind. Today, with better wind turbines and much better solar generation, it would be even less.
Gas peaking plants are being replaced with storage. In addition to environmental and economic concerns, the initial driver for this was loss of the Aliso gas storage field. Yes, gas needs storage.
I do think that lithium-ion batteries will be supplanted by more readily available materials in most grid applications. Mining impacts for generators and turbines needs to be considered as well when balancing the environmental books.
But it's really hard to match the environmental impact of coal mining or oil extraction.
@@BobKerns4111 and what of it's just not that windy one year?
Don't worry about mining; the environmentalists won't permit it.
Power plants are way more efficient at converting fossil fuels to energy vs car engines tbf
This comment needs a trillion likes.
You have to know the current load on the system. A given transformer or line might already be near its limit. Loads like an AC are intermittent. They only draw a lot when the compressor kicks on. A constant load is calculated differently than intermittent loads which are the majority of household load considerations. No doubt some areas will handle it just fine. Others will need their lines or transformer upgraded. The real fun will be supplying parking lots full of fast chargers.
My home has a contracted potency of 6.9KW (30A@ 230V) AC
Fast chargers are up to the 360KW mark, or over...
One fast charger sucks up as much power as over 50 homes like mine operating at full capacity, and a lot of fast chargers will be needed.. That will be really fun
Not mentioning AC to DC conversion losses or DC-DC voltage/amperage alteration losses
Today is the day that validates my warning to people that E.V.'s are just an intermediate step toward no vehicles period. A minister of the English government just announced recently that England plans to ban all personal vehicles...both ICE and electric. Instead, mass transit will replace them all. I saw the press interview myself. Why the ban? Because they already know they will never generate enough power ...like in Germany, where the costs are so high that people are being forced to choose between food and heat.
@@markanthony3275 need to go back to bicycle n horse, de urbanise , village life style ?
@@Froggability A woman working for Boris Johnson recently gave an interview stating that in the future England will "move away" from ALL personal vehicles...and everyone will be taking mass transit. What does that imply? That if you live in the country you will be forced to move into an urban centre...and the gov't will assume ownership of any property you leave behind.
@@AlldaylongRock home charging is about 9kw for evs
Only 12% to 30% of the gas you burn in the car is used to move the car. It would be much more energy efficient to burn the gas in a power station and charge electric cars. Also, if gas and diesel are burned at a power station, pollution can be controlled much more efficiently too. So forget intermittent things like solar panels and wind generators, when the sun don't shine or the wind does not blow, burn fuel.
You did all this math in your head while driving? I can't even listen to the radio while driving! Impressive! Cheers!
No, he mapped it out in his head first. Probably as an outline he glances at too.
That’s facts^^^😂😂😂
@@stevepowsinger733 still impressive for me
Yeah mate, he's ditched the whiteboard now😂
Its called passion
To keep it even simpler....a few summers ago when we were in a heat wave our county asked people NOT to use washers, dryers, or dishwashers until after the sun went down because just the uptick in A/C units was taxing the system. If the grid can't handle a dish washer or dryer during increased A/C use...how the heck is it going to handle 100s of thousands or millions of cars and trucks? Some stuff sounds good, but you need to THINK beyond just your bumper sticker.
What you describe is a poorly-planned grid, not anything inherent. Usually, this is due to a confluence of politics and short-term profit-taking. Political pressure to minimize power bills and maximize profits. Reliability and peak-handling capacity requires investment. With fossil fuels, it requires power plant capacity that sits idle most of the day, but can rapidly start up to meet peak demands. Those idle plants still consume capacity and some manpower. You also have to allow for outages due to maintenance or unexpected events. If your climate predictions are off, you may not build out enough. If your weather predictions are off, you might allow shutdowns that ought to be deferred to a lower-demand period.
But you're right-you do have to THINK. Grid planning is a lot more complex than just adding up the numbers. You have to consider each potential bottleneck in a wide array of circumstances. Videos like this are great for getting a sense of what's feasible, and general approach. Actual execution is very complex, and requires considerable advanced planning as well as minute-by-minute execution.
Even just in my kitchen, I can't run the microwave, air fryer and coffee pot in the morning to fix breakfast. Those three appliances overtax the line voltage and trips the breaker for the line going to the outlets in the kitchen. So when that line trips, everything in the kitchen including the fridge and the stove shut off. The lights are fine as they're on a different breaker switch.
Yes, he didn't mention gas and oil heating, cooking and water heating will all have to change from current fossil fuel use. Water heating is EXTREMELY electric intensive, one of the highest consumers in an average house beside air conditioning, and usually runs year round.
@@bigsky1970 Why did your electrician put everything on one breaker? Normally a kitchen should be supplied by at least 2 strings or 3 strings if you got three phases.
everyone needs to get a good bit more familiar with how an EV charges its battery. They're not pulling major amps like an AC unit, a refrigerator a Stove or Dryer. its much closer to a trickle charge. Devices that have a large current draw at turn on, do tax the grid instantly, and they are an issue to be sure. but EV chargers don't pull that much at one time. they are built to ramp up slowly and the battery management systems onboard are designed to manage the charge so that over charging and individual cell quality issues can be mitigated as much as possible.
This is all part of creating an EV battery system that will operate within the parameters of our current ( and outdated) grid transmission system.
Finally someone acknowledges apartment dwellers when talking about EV adoption!
In the uk councils are putting charging points in the street.
@@lilbaz8732 oh nice, your city council is charging your car and giving you parking for free
@@TKUA11 no you have to pay for the charging (just as you would have to pay your electricity bill if you charged at home). You get a residents parking permit, just as you do now.
People don't charge everyday 24/7. A building with 100 apartments might only need 5 DC fast charges to meet demand. Each car might only charge for 1/2hr once a week.
@@motoarzan791 spoken like someone that's never used an apartment complex laundry room.
Here in the UK, if all 10s of millions cars would switch to 50 -70 KWh EVs, and supposing there was a charging socket in every lamppost, the electric grid would collapse immediately.
We need one-dozen brand new nuclear power plants to generate the electricity produced by 20 million cars, roughly 14 Terawatts. A single reactor costs 7 billions $, and a power plant contain from 2 to 4 reactors.
Here they want to phase out ICE cars by 2030. Where they are going to get the 14 TWh?
Thanks for the video...
I learned so much from this video! It answered many question my family and I had. TY Jason
5:45
Good thing the population is going down instead of up!
Test drive MD review the type s already
europe lately figured out..........
*almost blackout in parts of europe, at only
@@Unknown-jl7mg They figured out the issue since atleast 2015. With sheer lack of grid power caused by the enviormental parties all over the place blocking the build of new power plants, which resulted in near crashes in unmeasurable volume many times since. Meanwhile the same parties are opting, ironically, for more electric power usage.
@@MrBerry1404 Nearly everything has to be electrified because we have to decarbonise our society if we don't want to destabilise it completely. We really don't have much choice. Those that move first are likely to do well out of it economically.
You forgot about Work Trucks, Tractor Trailers, Construction & Farm Equipment & Freight Trains to name a few that if were added I am sure the grid could not handle.. I really did like this video & the subject as I was wondering about it...
Thank you I was going to post a note and then I saw your comment. His formula has left out all of the infrastructure that we need to grow food and move packages around the country.
"In 40 years, we increase the amount of energy produced in the United States by FIVE TIMES."
Yes, but in the last 20 years it has only gone from 3.8T kWh to 4.1 kWh. Why? Because unless it is a windmill or a solar farm the government won't allow it. At that rate, the 30% increase required for EVs would take about a century...not 6.5 years.
Unless we want to start generating energy like we did in 1970?
good point
This ends badly, we’re going to find out the hard way that the electric grid and renewable generation won’t support electricity demand and high penetration of EVs. Lessons learned from what’s happening in Europe will be ignored by many in the US
In the US when there are hot weather conditions throughout the country and everyone is running their air conditioner, there are rolling blackouts. Now just imagine everyone trying to charge their EV at the same time on top of that, it's not gonna end well.
Time to go nuclear, push fusion through the fossil industry blockade, and learn how to coexist enough not to bomb each other's nuclear power plants.
@@BillAnt I literally just read an article about CA power officials begging people to reduce power use when the grid is overworked the most (4pm to 9pm) yet they think the grid can handle EVERY car being electric. Ya that sounds smart.
Then should we upgrade our infrastructure?
This analysis leaves out several critical points:
1. Average home likely has 2 cars.
2. Where does the electricity come from? Most likely gas or coal.
3. Over the life of an EV, there is a much larger carbon output than an internal combustion engine vehicle (when factoring how much carbon is produced during manufacturing and charging cycles)...on average 20 tons more per car. So, not really a "green" solution. If you actually care about the overall environmental impact, a hybrid is a much more "green" solution. Less overall carbon output than EV or ICE over the useful life of the vehicle.
4. Human behavior. You are assuming people are going to follow the charging limitations....they simply won't...for a variety of reasons.
5. The EV hype is a big fat lie! A placebo. It will continue to be a giant scam until power grids are generating electricity from a source other than coal or gas...which represents like 95% of the power plants in the U.S.
Me watching this in south africa while having scheduled 2 hour power outages every day
Me too. Cape Town
Lol
Are you running out of water and power?
@@sammiller6631 Yes. And it's because we put the most stupidest amongst us in charge.
The one's who only know how to steal.
Me in Italy, just realising that my average yearly electricity consumption at home, is equivalent to two months of an American house 🤦🏼♂️
Sounds like it's time for a new generation of nuclear reactors using more advanced fuel cycles and designed for enhanced safety.
Sounds like it's time to stop our disastrous population overshoot.
@@sinenomine4540 Let's start with you
@@johnsmiff9649 I'll do what I can. I don't breed like rats. I suggest the same to you.
I was thinking the same thing. The fear around nuclear is almost entirely unfounded. I would love to see some advancements in the industry.
@@sinenomine4540
And immigration.
What will be electricity saved from reduction in oil refineries however? Just net increase, but the big one as we're starting to discuss here in the UK is home heating. Cars arent that bad but imagine running your house heating, cooking etc. just on electric. That's hella lot of juice.
in brighton (just outside of boston) they are trying to ban natural gas. a lot of towns are. everyone wants electric. we can't keep up. factor in power outages etc and it will hault the economy when it happens. need to keep it as it is, diversified
Yeah, I think home heating will be the biggie - hope people are researching better heat pumps.
I'm from the US so there will be an additional factor for you (as 1.2 IMP gal = 1 US gal):
There are 139,600BTU/gal
1BTU = 0.000293kWh
So if you know how many gallons you use, or how many BTUs you require, you can figure out how many kWh of electricity it will require.
Annually, if I were to heat with electricity I'd consume ~20,744kWh. I live in New England, we have 6,531 HDD (heating degree days) per year.
that is roughly 3 cord of wood, 2.53tons of coal, or 507 gallons of oil (measures are different across the pond though).
Note: that is electric resistance heating, I have to do the math on a heat pump, which should be considerably more efficient.
@@richardchafe2986 I personally think banning natural gas is foolish. They better hope that the power never goes down.
Currently, it's more efficient to burn natural gas for heat, than to make power out of it. Unless everyone went to heat pumps, I don't see the advantage of going electric with heat, unless you have an overabundance of renewable.
Wow! From the point of the camera, it seems that entire presentation was done from memory. Maybe there were notes on the dash but it doesn't seem they were frequently referred to during the drive in some beautiful area. What a genius Jason is.
Wow! Very observant, I’m impressed that I didn’t think of the same thing. I usually notice that kinda stuff.
hes a great teacher.
Lol, after the "cold snap" in Texas I can tell you, currently, ERCOT won't let this whole EV thing happen here. (The timing of this video is just fantastic!)
Tesla will be cranking out 500,000 electric cars in austin texas next year.
@@kkarllwt as long as the factory is on a critical circuit! Lol
funny thing is you can use electric cars as energy storage for homes during blackouts. but ercot wont like that cause they cant charge higher rates like they are now
@@GTJay "as long as the factory is on a critical circuit! Lol" As far as I know, all Tesla factories have solar on their roof.
@@justsomeguy934 that solar only covers about 10% of the energy demand, factories are very power-hungry
6:11 Jason makes a threat. "Now we're at your house" >:D
Haha, I may or may not have given your cat a few pats. Great cat.
He's just making sure you're subscribed. You are, right?
@@EngineeringExplained 😊😊
Adding 30% to the power grid doesn't sound like a challenge until you realize that it's supposed to happen during the same time that most common means of energy production are also being significantly reduced... Or even banned. Currently most EVs actually run on coal. Because that is the source of most electricity in the US. But politicians have demonized coal and are actively trying to reduce the number of coal plants as we speak. If every state in the country were to start production on a new massive supermodern nuclear plant, everyone's switching to EVs might sound like a possibility. Right now it's a ridiculous pipe dream
These are the same people who replaced plastic straws wrapped in paper with paper straws wrapped in plastic.
@Robert Stanley You are actually very wrong. Many refineries actually INJECT power into the grid, it's called Cogeneration, they use the heat from combustion of some of the products to distill the crude and any waste heat is used to generate electricity, most of it is actually injected into the power grid. As for the consumption at the pump, how many KWs does a fuel pump at a gas station suck up? 2kw? L2 charging is between 3.5kw and 22KW, L3 goes up to 350KW. So charging an EV puts more load into the power grid than pumping gas.
@Robert Stanley The Sines refinery in Portugal installed a Gas fired Cogen setup in 2009. I tried to put a link up but the comment got automatically deleted. I reckon other refineries would do the same thing, extra money from the electricity sold, increased process efficiency, and looking good for the Greenies. All wins.
As for the PV argument, that only works if a battery is included in the installation. If not, you still put a load on the grid, both ways if everyone does it. Because most home charging is done AT NIGHT.
So as a US based consumer.. *WHY* would I want to change from my ICE cars to an BEV car that has all these limitations on range and timing of charging? How do I benefit?
If you have home charging, it's more convenient. Also you aren't limited on when you charge, he was talking about how time of use rates can get people who want to save money to not charge right when they get home. I have a plug in hybrid so I never have to go buy gas unless I'm on a road trip, home charging is awesome.
@@TAWithiam For local and if the homes service can support it ok. But 2-3 times a r I drive 1000miles non-stop. ANd of coarse the return 1000miles non-stop. (takes 16hrs)
For me... I want to be able to do that.
Home charging is more convenient, newer EVs easily get 300 miles of range and when you can charge at home it’s a non issue, EVs have less maintenance and moving parts
Biggest issue is how long will the battery last and road trips
Me while I drive: Talk about traffic, scenery etc.
Engineering Explained while he drives: pretty much engineers.
Note to self: A 30% increase in anything is a huge amount (but especially energy .)
exactly... using percentages to prove your point is disingenuous. 30% of 10 is 3, and 30% of 100 is 30. So saying, "we were able to increase power production by 30% in just a few short years before would mean that we can do it again" is just asinine! That is no different than arguments by the Biden Administration saying that inflation rate of 8.3% isn't that bad because it barely moved an inch from the previous year's rate of 8.2%. Percentages make a crisis look like a hiccup! It is the raw numbers that matter in this case!
Also doesn’t help that almost all those increases were done with fossil fuel plants. But now they want to do solar and wind so that 30% increase is going to be even harder.
Hopefully we would be able to set up/have timers for charging, like our sprinklers or coffee makers.
The Tesla lets you control that by app, and I can't imagine the other top-tier car manufacturers don't have similar setups. Plus, most of the car charging happens during the night and evening off peak need (because most of it is after you get home from work and top off after your daily commute).
@@hadleyjolley3375 yes... There's control through the car, and some charging options are wifi connected, and can control charging too.
Incentives to slow down charging when needed seems like an obvious solution.
Like Amazon offers a $1 for using slower shipping.
my 10 year old nissan leaf can be programmed when to charge or can be controlled by wifi.
@@chippewabridge my 5 year old Volt can’t but it takes 12 hours to charge off a household plug.
However letting the driver choose the time, would defeat the overall value of that.
You know as well as I do that if average Karen Sue or Leroy Bob is low on charge when they pull in, they will charge starting immediately. Teen driver(s) started 30 minutes ago, cause they have a date and their old EV clunker (you stuck them with) has little battery life.
So a four EV family pulls in from school, practice, work, and the gym at around 6pm. They all hit the charger. You had to install 4 to avoid fights last year. Same time the microwaves, air fryers, stoves, lights, TVs, PCs, gameconsolesallcome on right about then in a mad dash to warm dinner.
Everyone on the block does exactly the same. Look at your cellphone for an example.
BTW 6PM Solar and Wind die, and the duck rears its head to be slayed by the fossil fuel powerplant.
You can discourage this with higher prices at higher use times, but we all know, at best, only one person in a house gives a damned about the cost.
Turn off the lights Heather. Ohhhh you're such a nagg.
Again the problem is using the absolute amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline for the calculation. Yes, there is 33.7 kwhrs in a gallon of gasoline, but on average less than 30% of it is utilized. Furthermore, the issue is more the energy USED to MAKE gasoline, which is at least 8 kwhrs which then gets displaced to go towards charging evs. These are huge factors needed for this calculation and not seen anywhere. So yeah, the numbers will end up being far lower than seen here.
You should probably take into account that electricity production in the U.S has not seen a net increase since 2007, and current regulations make it very difficult and costly to on-line any new significant production facilities. The slight increase of production coming from renewable sources in the past 15 years has been dwarfed by the net reduction in generation from coal-fired plants, while natural gas has seen the biggest net increase as coal plants are converted to natural gas.
To increase production by 30% will require some significant changes in energy policy and regulation, and achieving that in 6.5 years is not only unrealistic, but impossible at this point.
If, however, the regulators would open pathways for more nuclear generation, and/or return to clean coal, we could see that goal met in 20-30 years. The most realistic expectation, however, is that we continue to increase production from burning natural gas to meet the goal, and increase the rate at which we build natural gas fired plants - which negates the whole purpose in the first place.
The biggest problem, however, comes from the manufacture of all those lithium batteries, as their functional lifespan simply is not yet long enough to be practical on such a large scale. It's difficult enough to fathom mining enough lithium and rare earth minerals to produce enough batteries to replace every I.C.-powered vehicle with electric, but then you need to consider the compounded affect of repeating that entire process every 2-5 years in battery production. Technology simply isn't there yet, nor is it even on the cusp of being on its way there.
So, until we overcome some of these massive hurdles, let's be happy that the idea of owning an EV as an individual is even plausible, and aim for a more realistically-sustainable goal, such as 5%. And until then, let's restart oil extraction and increase gasoline production in order to not bankrupt families while we let the technology continue to develop on an organic course. If it becomes commercially viable on a large scale, individuals will naturally transition for convenience sake. That's the ticket.
I was going to say the same thing. EPA and left leaning politicians and activist don't want any new nuclear, coal, gas or other plants. So how do you even get 10% increase with that? Wind and solar wont do it. I am really curious how this "easy" 30% will be created.
We desperately need new nuclear plants, but even I worry about the waste products. So does that mean some new "cleaner" coal and gas plants? Has to be or we all suffer rolling blackouts nationwide. I bet the latter because the progressives seem to want us to all suffer and for long periods of time.
Additionally, having everything seemingly dependent on electricity, creates less competition, holding us hostage to power companies and price hikes. Also, what about foreign interference with our power grids, an attack so to speak? People don't understand that once a power grid goes down, it's not simple to get the grid back and running -different than a local power outage. Electricity doesn't move on it's own, it has to be cycled or moved. If everything runs on electricity in the future, including all new vehicles and our power grids go down, there's no way to mobilize our military for more than a short time (if it's all gone electric) and citizens would be extremely limited in their ability to travel, go to work, evacuate etc. Besides the negative environmental impact of producing electric vehicles and the far higher cost to purchase an electric vehicle, there's other factors we should be looking at too.
What about foreign interference with oil production, which we are currently right now experiencing, resulting in hugely inflated gas prices? I’d rather drive a car I can power with anything. Gas, diesel, propane, grid power, solar panels… I can even slap a TEG on the side of my wood stove and charge it off of that. I’m not chained to the price of a barrel of oil, and I don’t suffer when there is a local gas shortage, OR a power outage.
@@RealBenAnderson Foreign interference with oil production? You mean Russia's control of Nord-Stream 2 that the Trump administration repeatedly warned was a horrible and risky idea? Here in the U.S. we have the means to be energy independent, and the Biden Administration has chosen to reduce our production, cancel further projects, and penalize the fossil fuel industry into submission. THAT is why the U.S is paying 5.00-6.50/ gallon for fuel and even more for diesel. The demand for energy hasn't decreased, it's increased, but we now have to look to other countries for that energy - countries that have far far less and sometimes no regulation on production standards. All these geniuses buying / forcing the market toward electric cars thinking they're doing the world a favor don't realize it takes fossil fuels to produce the electricity to charge them. Beyond that the ecological impact of producing massive batteries that run electric cars exceeds that of the production and operation of a modern gasoline powered car. This forced global movement toward electric everything will be the folly of the next decade and possibly longer.
@@Fmandan77 I’m so glad you care so much about the environment. Personally, I drive an EV because it’s superior technology, not because of anything to do with the environment, although a reduction in pollution sure is nice, and it takes less energy to charge an EV than it does to refine gasoline. So, you’re burning diesel to pump oil, then burning coal to refine it, then burning it again in a car… seems pretty wasteful to me. But what do I know, I’m just a libtard that voted for Trump twice. Wait, what? Yeah, also a gun-carrying pro-life evangelical Christian Army veteran. But go ahead and put me in a box so you don’t have to deal with me.
@@RealBenAnderson Did I insult you somehow? How am I putting you in a box? I don't know you at all. I simply responded to your comment about foreign interference of oil production because I don't think global events are the entire reason for high gas prices in the U.S. There's no shortage of information out there about the amount of energy required to produce electric vehicles, let alone keep on running everyday. That amount of energy far exceeds that of refining petroleum. I value the free-market with sensible government regulation. I believe hybrid cars that run on both gasoline and electricity are an amazing compromise, as well as ultra efficient small displacement gasoline engines. If people want electric vehicles, like Tesla's, then let the manufactures compete for the market share so that consumers truly get a quality product at a competitive price rather than forcing the creation of a market that doesn't exist (yet).
Actually there will be millions of more competitors due to home solar lmao, you are thinking the grid will be centralized when in reality a smart grid would be decentralized so a whole area wouldn't ever have a blackout just a few houses. If you and you neighbors generate electricity you are less vulnerable to market variability.
I don't think anyone is arguing that a tank should be electric, the energy density won't be there for another few decades.
And yes with OPEC, we totally weren't being influenced. Again having a decentralized network would make it harder for cyber attacks to be effective, and it would be harder for a government to withhold materials to affect commodity prices.
Electric heavy duty vehicles (semis) would make the electricity demands of personal vehicles look miniscule in comparison.
Yes, but heavy duty vehicles could have hydrogen as a fuel.
@@SlawcioD A reszte elektrykow bedziemy ladowac kablami z balkonu heh
@@user-xb5zu6zu7j no nie, zawsze będziesz mógł podjechać do stacji paliw narodowego koncernu paliwowego i "zatankować" jedyny prawilny prąd z wungla ;)
@@SlawcioD yeah hydrogen is cool but it's not a simple solution to implement either, first off making the hydrogen, an easy process but takes tons of electricity to it, then there is the storage and transport of the hydrogen, you have to compress it to have enough density to make it worth it, so you have have to have a completely new grid of high pressure storage tanks in distribution and fueling stations, then there is converting all the trucks, and don't forget to mention that at the end of the day you have a bunch of trucks driving around with a bomb attached. (compressed hydrogen tanks+crash=booom, ever see a picture of the graf zeppelin going up in flames, and that wasn't even compressed hydro) at least with electric, the distribution grid has already been started.
No way current battery technology can power long haul trucks.
I always love your informative videos. There are other factors: changing weather patterns- declining Lake Mead levels can stop hydroelectric power generation for a big part of the Western US population; closing coal plants to reduce power input to the grid; the costs incurred by electric companies for increased demand- and pollution- will be passed on to all consumers, or potentially be limited by environmental regulations. The real irony is that ultimately electric cars are coal cars, as much of the electricity was generated by coal.
coal is around 20% of US energy production and dropping so your last comment is a bit odd. Excellent point about the pending hydro issues out west though. It's only 6% nationwide, but on a local level it is definitely an added hurdle.
Just use a diesel generator in your yard to charge your EV
Lol!
That would be cleaner than using a coal power plant to make the electricity
But wouldn’t diesel be banned by then ?
If IC engine cars are going extinct, so will IC engine generators
better yet, swap a V8 into your model 3.
As someone who works in the electric energy industry, simple answer HELL NO!!! The grid can barely keep up with the current demand. No pun intended!!
I am in the industry, too. These retards trying to wargame with napkin math have ZERO idea how terrible our grid infrastructure already is.
Too bad you have no numbers, logic or reason to support your opinion. That means, your opinion is as they say, like an asshole.
Banned? Looks like Mad Max will be a reality sooner than I thought
"we are killing for gasoline"
Nah we’re just killing to kill
-all cops
Question OP. How far can you get on 1 gallon??
yes liñvd that mivie
As a retired auto mechanic/coal power plant worker, using EV's in the upper Midwest will show what cold winters will do to battery usage maintaining cabin heat, and more importantly throw road salt at high voltage wiring will result in fires that nobody is talking about!
This summer the Midwest power grid is almost at a tipping point.
My employer power company is looking into higher fees for higher current needs for EV's in the future.
Norwegian here👋 There are several ways this issue has been handled here. Parking lots at malls and office buildings often have a proportion of spaces exclusively for EVs equipped with chargers. At least one company, Easee, make "smart chargers" that don't charge during peak hours.
That said, EVs are mostly adopted in urban areas. Because driving distances in urban areas are a lot shorter here than in US urban areas, power consumption from everyday drives are probably here.
I guess you guys don’t have the 120V issue either. Here, if you want to charge without any infrastructure through a standard outlet, you’re limited to 1500W.
In Europe you have standard outlet rated for almost double, which mean that way more people can charge without having a wall plug installed at home.
As I understand, Norway generates most of the electricity via hydroelectric generators along with a relatively smaller population compared to the U.S.
@@johnhautzeneroeder7321 Thats true, though I'm not sure how that relates to the capacity of the grid.
In the UK, we’ve had power companies offering cheaper power overnight for quite some time. These are usually referred to as “Economy 7” plans that offer cheaper electricity from midnight to 7am and you just have to have a special meter installed to track your peak and off-peak power usage
In the future we will have cheaper electricity when the wind is blowing hard. And very, very expensive electricity when the wind isn't blowing.
@@raytrevor1 maybe, maybe not. The dynamics of cheaper off-peak power will still exist, and the power grid will hopefully be robust and diverse enough that we won't need to rely on discounts to steer people away from consuming at certain times.
Besides, unlike demand, wind (and solar to an extent) output is relatively unpredictable; consumers can't schedule their car charging/wash cycles/etc at "cheap" times in such a system and can't really know about those stats in the first place. In effect, you'd only be using a lot of electricity during "high output" periods by chance, because you wouldn't know about that schedule to begin with. And as a power company, I also have no real reason to discount my electricty in this case (whereas its currently done to smooth demand in the face of constant-ish supply).
Same in Kansas. Power costs more during the early- mid afternoon, than the rest of the day.
@@tangydiesel1886 you have a pretty high wind generation percentage now - expect there to be some factors to encourage use when that % is very high... cars are smart enough to stay connected and use it cost effectively, if people can find a way to stay parked at a charging point (of whatever design...)
@@lylestavast7652 I can see that coming. It is crazy how fast our grid has changed, where we make more wind power now, than any other form of electricity. Our population is pretty low compared to other states though.
I could see in populated areas, electric cars could be used as grid storage, and people could op in to allow discharging during the day, and get payed for it.
Here's the fact's, I've been getting emails all week asking to turn down the heating unit and not use electric stoves or water heaters because the electric grid is at maximum capacity and they had to shut down 2 substations and do rolling black outs, this is in Louisiana, never mind the problems Texas is having!
Because energy companies have been cheap and haven’t listened to the engineers for the past 20 years
Because the chaos is all part of the plan.
Nicely done. Many observers are missing the hypothetical part of this video: “……if all cars in the US were suddenly EV’s all at the same time. “His point is that the grid could handle the increased demand if this hypothetical changeover happened. I have talked with numerous folks who are, for any number of reasons, anti EV. The question they ask, that there is no easy answer to, is how much fossil fuel is burned in the power generation end to fully charge an EV. In my opinion, there is an increasingly powerful shift towards renewable energy (wind and solar) as their cost comes down and fossil fuel reserves dwindle. I’m old, and I won’t see how this plays out, but I am confident that the world as we know it would not exist without electricity, but at some point it will exist without coal, natural gas, and oil.
YES! somebody finally looked into this. With our aging infrastructure, I'm worried our transmission lines will melt like a fuse.
Haha I've been worried about it as well but once you realize how it all works I don't think it's going to be a huge issue.
My house is at the end of a tap line and if everyone on our block charged at the same time, I think it's more that our immediate transformer could take.
We increased our energy supply 30% in the 40 year time period to meet demands without EV's, what percentage in addition to that 30% will the EV's need over the next decade or so?
If EV's are exceeding 100 mpg equivalent, there's a lot of savings at the gas pump.
Throw in an electromagnetic pulse and have a good ole’ time.
" I'm worried our transmission lines will melt like a fuse." Given that 95% of electric car owners charge off-peak, that's not a problem. User demand for energy during peak times is the real variant.
@@justsomeguy934 Not sure where you are living, but I have seen a number of EV charging up during the day at shopping plazas. No off peak there.
As someone who works for a hydro company I can promise you the grid would fail.
you are the first channel to address this question I have been asking for about 10 years....welcome to the era of the rolling blackout
The batteries could be made to supply the grid when needed and increase reliability and stability. Everyone can't come home turn on the AC and electric range plus plug in Their TESLA and their RIVIAN, NFW, If it was not for the reduction of incandescent lamps the grid could not have handled the addition of loads from computers.
@@melaniecotterell8263 when they use the entire Earth's gobal production of rare-earth minerals to make those batteries.....
@@therealfearsome And that will only produce a protion of the need. Without some new form of storage methodology, it ain't a gonna happen.
We added solar power to our house 4 years ago, and haven’t painted an electric bill since. We’re planning on purchasing an EV in late 2023-early 2024. Can’t wait to eliminate another expense!
The history rabbit hole of air conditioning and refrigeration is fascinating and everyone should check it out, we really take it for granted now. I'm glad he made that comparison
I also look at the tech boom.
Went from the 80s with average house having 0.7 TVs. To now over 3! With 2.5 computers, tablets, cable modems, WiFi etc.
Can you please do an episode about lithium mining. Is there enough known lithium on the planet for everyone to be driving EVs? Will we just be trading one limited resource for another? Thank you for the information. I love how prepared you are that you recite the info while driving around. Seeing car people like you buying EVs helped push me to by one. I've been driving a Model 3 for just over a month and truly believe it is a better car in almost every single way at least for a daily driver commuter car. If people still want gas cars for toys I think that's just fine. But I think at least 95% of the cars on the road would be better off if they were electric. Thanks!
@Benjamin Winner - I encourage you to investigate just how little lithium goes into a Lithium Ion battery
@@michaelharrison1093 AND how much lithium is available. There is a hell of a lot.
@@FutureSystem738 Tesla is switching to nickel, a very abundant metal.
Someone will crack the sulfur battery.
With new battery technology there is enough raw material “KNOWN” to build 4 batteries for every car on the planet.
And there will be more and more materials found as demand increases.
I just got a flex alert on my phone and it is only mid June and 102F. Good luck with the additional load.
"Good luck with the additional load." EVs charge off-peak, at night, it won't be a problem.
@@justsomeguy934 Until the wild fire season, PG&E and SCE equipment fail causing massive fire shutting down the grid. Then all the peaker high pollution plant start running. Then it becomes a problem. Like FSD, every is fine until it disengage and you thought it is still working and you hit a truck or a divider. Everything work until it doesn't. I am still for electrification, but we are not ready. That is reality.
@@chrislu9574 " I am still for electrification, but we are not ready. That is reality." What you describe are California's energy problems and I assure you that they are due to California's politics, not renewable energy. PG&E will poison you and leave you without power if it means a better bottom line on their balance sheet. I live in a cold, mountainous state where -10F is common in winter and we have 30% renewable energy. Ultra-reliable, cheap energy. PG&E's grid failing during fires is their fault for lack of maintenance and planning.
We're already electrified, you're using it to write your message. That is reality.
So what is the trade in value of an ev nearing the end of its battery life? I would NEVER buy a used ev. Total range drops as the batteries age and there's no getting around that. Therefore the secondary market for ev's will be crap. Once dealers realize that nobody wants to buy a used ev they will not give much in trade for one. Remember, dealers need to make at least 20% profit on your trade in. Further, there's a point where battery replacement costs more than the total value of the car and you can only kick that can down the road so far. This is just my opinion though.
One more engineering factor to take into account: conduit aging. Fresh oxygen-free copper is an exceptional electrical conductor. However, once it begins to interact with oxygen, it becomes cupric oxide which doesn't allow for the flow of electrons hardly at all. In fact, traditionally clad copper wires lose about 50% of their conductivity over 20 years. While extra capacity has been built into the last mile of our power grid to account for this progressive loss, the added demand for charging electric cars could necessitate rewiring many neighborhoods, as well as some homes, if the increased risk of fire is to be avoided. This would not be cheap for the consumer, especially when one should expect the price of copper to greatly increase with such a massive world-wide demand.
This is WRONG! Copper does not have any appreciable loss in 100 years. Further there are very few remaining long haul copper transmission lines. Almost all are stranded aluminum with a steel center support. Aluminum also has negligible conduction loss with age. It forms a microscopic layer of oxide which stops further oxidation. Average loss from the power plant to the user is only 5%.
@@17630973 Galvanic corrosion of those steel cores is a very real problem.
Don't know where you live, but in Arizona I worked in the field at an electric utility and never heard of replacing wire because it was old, corroded, or whatever. All the wire I saw was aluminum all the way through. Never saw any transmission level line, but never saw it being replaced either.
Am I the only one impressed how he is able to ramble off all these numbers while driving?
yeah, I'd be rendered mute in the first minute. Very impressive.
He's a clever boy 😊
clearly not the only one as it's been mentioned endlessly in comments, lol - it's called a script by the way.
Not according to the hundreds of other comments saying the same thing.
Interesting and well thought out. I still have a few concerns though. First is the increased cost of electricity that will inevitably occur when everything is dependent upon the grid. Second is the environmental cost of increased power production, even through “green” means. Third is that projecting increases in available power based on what we did in the past fifty years is pretty sketchy, particularly given the amount of government involvement required to improve the power grid. The last ( for now) is that increasing power output across the board puts the power producers into competition with EV manufacturers for materials that are in short supply, and environmentally damaging to procure and process. This seems more and more like a zero sum situation where mobility is concerned.
It's actually decreased overall energy production (electricity and fossil fuel), since EVs are way more efficient than gasoline cars. Oil production will fall, since most is used for transportation, and oil production has a high environmental cost. Electricity production will have to increase. Currently, electricity production in the US is VERY roughly 40% natural gas, 20% coal, 20% nuclear, and 20% renewables (hydro, wind, solar, etc.), with coal dropping, renewables increasing, and the others relatively stable. So, an EV currently gets around 40% of its electricity from non-fossil fuel sources, which is already an advantage. Plus, stationary natural gas generators have an efficiency advantage over an inefficient automobile engine which wastes tons of heat energy. And, as the grid uses more renewables and less fossil fuels, EVs that charge from the grid automatically do the same. That's not true for gasoline cars.
You use the figure 33.7 kWh per gallon of gasoline. This is the amount of heat energy available from burning one gallon of gasoline, not the amount of mechanical energy that can be produced by an internal combustion engine running on one gallon of gasoline. Remember, an ICE is only around 30% efficient due to the second law of thermodynamics. On the other hand the efficiency of large electric motors is in the high 90’s.
For example a Chevy Bolt gets about 4 miles per kilowatt hour. A similar size and weight car might get around 30 mpg. From this comparison you can see that a gallon of gas is roughly equivalent to 7.5 kWh when used to power a car. You can do this comparison between your Tesla and your gas powered car.
This has a profound effect on the messages in your videos about electric cars. One quarter the number of flavored sparkling water cans, one quarter the load on the power grid.