Will Electric Cars Transform the Workforce? (laist.com) 181
Gas-powered vehicles "have hundreds of moving parts and other components" that keep mechanics busy, argues CalMatters (which describes itself as a "nonpartisan and nonprofit news organization.")
"By 2040, the state projects that nearly 32,000 auto mechanics jobs will be lost in California, since electric vehicles need far less maintenance and repair than conventional combustion engines." And they base that prediction on statistics from the state's own Air Resources Board (part of California's Environmental Protection Agency): Throughout the economy, an estimated 64,700 jobs will be lost because of the mandate, according to the California Air Resources Board's calculations. On the other hand, an estimated 24,900 jobs would be gained in other sectors, so the estimated net loss is 39,800 jobs, a minimal amount across the state's entire economy, by 2040. But no single workforce in the state would be hurt more than auto mechanics: California has about 60,910 auto service technicians and mechanics, and more than half of those jobs would be lost over the next two decades if the mandate goes into effect, the air board calculates....
Some industries gain jobs while others lose them as the state shifts to zero-emission vehicles. The retail trade sector, which includes gas station workers and automobile and parts dealers, would lose 38,669 jobs by 2040 or about 2% of the retail workforce. Most of the losses would be at gasoline stations. As the electric vehicle fleet grows, air board officials project gas stations could provide charging to offset the losses.... Another 20,831 jobs in state and local government would be eliminated because of the decrease in gas tax revenue.
But the transition to electric cars also will create thousands of jobs. Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and other power industry companies would benefit most, with the creation of about 5,600 jobs by 2040 as car owners spend more on electricity to power their vehicles. Insurance carriers will benefit from about 1,700 new jobs, while the construction industry is expected to gain about 3,600.... Mechanics who work on internal combustion engines would still have plenty of work: The rule would not ban sales of used cars, and it wouldn't force the state's residents to stop driving the roughly 29 million gas-powered cars that are already on the road. Californians also could keep importing new or used vehicles from out of state.
That means Californians will still own a lot of gas-powered cars past 2035, softening the blow for car mechanics and industries dependent on fossil fuels, said James Sallee, an economist and research associate at the Energy Institute at University of California, Berkeley's Haas School of Business. Sallee said the changes wouldn't occur fast enough to trigger a sharp economic slowdown within the auto repair industry.
One 67-year-old mechanic still tells CalMatters that "The electric vehicle repair market is just about nonexistent."
But another mechanic tells them "I'm not against electric vehicles. I've always loved cars and I'll work on them until I can't anymore. So we have to adjust. We have to get out of our comfort zones."
"By 2040, the state projects that nearly 32,000 auto mechanics jobs will be lost in California, since electric vehicles need far less maintenance and repair than conventional combustion engines." And they base that prediction on statistics from the state's own Air Resources Board (part of California's Environmental Protection Agency): Throughout the economy, an estimated 64,700 jobs will be lost because of the mandate, according to the California Air Resources Board's calculations. On the other hand, an estimated 24,900 jobs would be gained in other sectors, so the estimated net loss is 39,800 jobs, a minimal amount across the state's entire economy, by 2040. But no single workforce in the state would be hurt more than auto mechanics: California has about 60,910 auto service technicians and mechanics, and more than half of those jobs would be lost over the next two decades if the mandate goes into effect, the air board calculates....
Some industries gain jobs while others lose them as the state shifts to zero-emission vehicles. The retail trade sector, which includes gas station workers and automobile and parts dealers, would lose 38,669 jobs by 2040 or about 2% of the retail workforce. Most of the losses would be at gasoline stations. As the electric vehicle fleet grows, air board officials project gas stations could provide charging to offset the losses.... Another 20,831 jobs in state and local government would be eliminated because of the decrease in gas tax revenue.
But the transition to electric cars also will create thousands of jobs. Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and other power industry companies would benefit most, with the creation of about 5,600 jobs by 2040 as car owners spend more on electricity to power their vehicles. Insurance carriers will benefit from about 1,700 new jobs, while the construction industry is expected to gain about 3,600.... Mechanics who work on internal combustion engines would still have plenty of work: The rule would not ban sales of used cars, and it wouldn't force the state's residents to stop driving the roughly 29 million gas-powered cars that are already on the road. Californians also could keep importing new or used vehicles from out of state.
That means Californians will still own a lot of gas-powered cars past 2035, softening the blow for car mechanics and industries dependent on fossil fuels, said James Sallee, an economist and research associate at the Energy Institute at University of California, Berkeley's Haas School of Business. Sallee said the changes wouldn't occur fast enough to trigger a sharp economic slowdown within the auto repair industry.
One 67-year-old mechanic still tells CalMatters that "The electric vehicle repair market is just about nonexistent."
But another mechanic tells them "I'm not against electric vehicles. I've always loved cars and I'll work on them until I can't anymore. So we have to adjust. We have to get out of our comfort zones."
In USA, electric cars transform the workforce (Score:5, Funny)
On Cybertron, workforce transforms into electric cars.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar power. Don't tell me you don't know what it is. Google it. Why should we take you seriously when you have never even heard of solar power?
Re: (Score:2)
Or hydro, wind, wave or even nuclear and (in less than a decade!!1) fusion?
Alos, over the life time. (Score:3)
And also, "over the lifetime" considerations:
You'll here people complaining that building EV, and constructing low emission energy production still emits lots of CO2, so it's not zero emission neither.
Yes, electric cars cost a tiny bit more emission to manufacture, mostly due to their batteries, when compared to manufacturing an ICE powered car. ...once you factor in the lifetime of the car, these manufacturing emissions are absolutely dwarfed by the gobsmackingly large amount of fossils that ICE cars b
BUT!
Far less? (Score:4, Interesting)
Perhaps less with regard to the ICE itself, but the rest of the car's systems are pretty much the same -- A/C, brakes, steering, suspension, tires, etc... I don't have an electric vehicle, so can't speak directly to them, but I have a 2001 Honda Civic EX (150k miles) and 2002 Honda CR-V EX (50k miles -- my wife's, who died in 2006) that I keep well maintained and most of the expenses over the years are for non-engine wear items. (Both do need to be painted as the clear coat is starting to fail after 20+ years parked outside.) Sure an electric vehicle will eliminate the periodic oil and coolant changes and the once every 7-year / 100k miles items like spark plugs and timing belt (though my CR-V has a permanent timing chain), but I imagine there will be other maintenance items specific to EVs. Perhaps EV will require far less maintenance for people who neglect their ICE vehicles...
Re:Far less? (Score:5, Insightful)
Brakes are one thing that you need less maintenance of in an EV, because most of the braking is regenerative breaking which does not wear down your break pads. Consequently they will need replacing far less often.
Re:Far less? (Score:5, Informative)
Brakes are one thing that you need less maintenance of in an EV, because most of the braking is regenerative breaking which does not wear down your break pads. Consequently they will need replacing far less often.
This is true. I have seen very minimal wear on the brakes of my PHEV. However, I try to maximize regenerative braking, i.e., by coasting to a stop. On the other hand, I've seen much faster wear on tires, with tires needing to be replaced around 20,000 miles on my car. That really surprised me. This is due to greater torque (why get an *EV car if you aren't going to feel the acceleration?) and the weight of the batteries. From my experience the cost and frequency of tire replacement outweighs the benefits of slower brake wear.
Re: (Score:2)
I have almost 28,000 miles on my Model 3. They will probably need replacement at about 30k.
Isn't that just because (Score:2)
Consumer grade EV (Score:3)
I don't know of a consumer grade EV except maybe the Chevy spark. Everything else I've seen has been fairly high-end SUVs or Tesla's and BMWs.
In Europe the Renault Zo (and Nissan Leaf) tend to be popular.
But I've never owned one personally, only drove a lot of km on Zoés from the local car sharing, who took care of tires themselves, so I can't comment on the tire costs.
Re: (Score:2)
Brakes are one thing that you need less maintenance of in an EV, because most of the braking is regenerative breaking which does not wear down your break pads. Consequently they will need replacing far less often.
Thanks, good example of how similar systems are different on ICE vs EV. But how often are they typically replaced anyway? I think the brake pads have been replaced once on both my vehicles over 20+ years -- most of the Civic's 150k miles are highway while the CR-V's 50k miles are city.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, not very often. I've done track days in my car and still only replaced pads once in 10 years. It's a Miata though so so with a heavier car and more city driving it might be more often. Also the calipers sometimes go bad and get stuck especially if you have winter. Still, it's a very quick, easy and cheap thing to replace.
I think internal engine failure is (thankfully) going to be pretty rare with reasonable usage nowadays. What's more likely is various electronics and accessories going bad. Coils, plu
Re: (Score:3)
most of the braking is regenerative breaking which does not wear down your break pads.
Yes - I recently bought a new car, chose an electric one and set the regeneration level to high. I got used to one-pedal driving very quickly, and I find it more comfortable and pleasant than the three pedal style (my previous car had a shift-stick). I hardly use the brakes in regular city driving, and when I do it's at low speeds, having used regenerative braking for most of the slow down.
Another thing is that the recommended service period for my car is only once every two years or 21000 miles - as oppose
Re: (Score:2)
That is not what I observed on my 2012 Nissan Leaf. The brake pads wore out quickly, and I had to be replaced before I returned it at the end of the lease. Living on a hill might have something to do with it. The street is very steep. I haven't seen the same on our current 2015 Volt and 2017 Volt, though.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I figured there had to be a variables. The Leaf battery was only air-cooled also, whereas the Bolt and Volt are liquid-cooled.
The Leaf had a small battery pack, and I always charged it at 100% for that reason. The fact that it was always full when leaving home and driving downhill. Perhaps there was nowhere for the energy to go except the brake pads in this case. Though we always charge our Volt and Bolt in full as well, and drive the same downhill, and just haven't had the same issue yet. It could
Re: Far less? (Score:3)
Re: Far less? (Score:3)
As I recall, the only options for charging on my 2012 Leaf were 80% and 100% I had a hard enough time living within the 100% battery range that I would never have considered charging at 80%. 97% perhaps, but it wasn't available.
Glad I returned that Leaf to Nissan.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I have no idea how BMW has been using the same terrible brake design for so long. Everyone always talks about how great BMW is at making cars.... and frankly, I keep my cars from the time they're purchased new until I calculate that the cost of ownership is hi
Re:Far less? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah but that work is pretty cheap and low skill (Score:3)
This happened during both industr
Re: (Score:2)
Brake jobs are expensive because people are kind of dumb when it comes to cars but they're super cheap to do.
I've actually replaced brake pads (and shoes) myself. It's not really that difficult, just a little messy.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
100,000 miles on my Tesla.
Only maintenance was tires. They lasted about 30,000 miles a set.
No other maintenance. No oil, lube, antifreeze, transmission, etc.
Seems unlikely from my experience (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea that mechanic work will be cut in half doesn't jive with my experience over the decades owning cars. The last few times my cars have been to the shop:
Annual safety inspections (not engine specific)
Suspension problems (not engine specific)
Airbag related recall (not engine specific)
New tires (not engine specific)
Collision repair (valet parking guy had an oops - not engine specific)
At least the last four times my cars have been to the shop, it hasn't had anything to do with the engine. The car is going to need tires, airbags, etc just the whether it's power by gasoline, by a natural gas electric plant, or by magic fairy dust. Unless the rest of you are all using much less reliable engines than I've ever had, I don't think fully half the work that gets done is on the engine. I suspect you have problems with your air conditioning, infotainment systems, etc, not so much your engine all the time.
Even IF half the work was on engines, so say it'll cut mechanics work in half presupposes that electric vehicles never have any trouble or need any maintenance on their motors, batteries, etc. I suspect electric systems will need work occasionally too.
Re: (Score:3)
The article didn't say there would be *no* mechanics left, just that 32,000 are likely to no longer be needed out of a total of about 61,000 existing mechanics. New tyres and your tracking checked is a lot quicker than having your timing belt replaced.
There are still people making buggy whips, just not as many as there where 100 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
The claim is very specific "California has about 60,910 auto service technicians and mechanics, and more than half of those jobs would be lost". The claim is "more than half".
Considering that zero percent of of my recent car maintenance and repair has been engine related, I find "more than half" an unlikely statement. I've owned a lot of cars over the decades. Maybe 5% of my auto repair and maintenance has been on the engine. EVERY car I've owned has had tires replaced; less than 10% have needed engine wor
Re: (Score:3)
The scheduled maintenance for my car for the first 5 years is:
- oil and filter change every 12 months
- brake inspection, clean and lubrication every 24 months
- cabin air filter replacement every 24 months
- drive belt inspection and engine air filter replacement every 36 months
- exhaust inspection every 48 months
- spark plugs every 120,000 km
- engine coolant at 120 months
Of that list, only the cabin air filter is relevant to an EV. A lot of the routine stuff is engine related, a lot of it has already gone aw
12 months isn't less than five years. (Score:2)
You're thinking of an EV that doesn't have air conditioning, or indeed brakes?
"brake inspection, clean and lubrication" is needed on an EV as much as it is on the same car with an ICE.
Your AC is still driven by the same belt, or an whole new motor, which has it's own failure points including brushes that will wear out over time.
Btw: ...
> my car for the first 5 years is:
> spark plugs every 120,000 km
> engine coolant at 120 months
120 months is a bit longer than five years. As is 120,000km, for most p
Re: 12 months isn't less than five years. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
EV brakes generally last way longer because of regenerative braking. EVs driven in "one pedal mode" often don't use brakes except to stop - the regen braking will get you down to about 5-10mph or so, then brakes are applied to slow to a stop.
This slow speed braking basically puts almost no wear on them - you can go 5 years of this and still have 90% of the brake pads still available.
Re: Seems unlikely from my experience (Score:2)
Transmission is also simpler and less likely to need a rebuild. (It's not really a transmission just the differential they have on an ICE and maybe one more gear to give the drive unit a particular ratio)
There also are a ton of new things added making them more complicated like ADAS systems etc.
Re: (Score:3)
It's hard to extrapolate from an individual experience. The plural of anecdote is not data.
I don't know how accurate the following is :
https://www.centennialcollege.ca/centennial-college-blog/2017/june/23/the-nine-most-common-car-repairs/
1) is spark plugs. I had to have them replaced on at least one of our Prius; probably multiple.
2) fuel cap. Actually happened too. Needed replacement
3) oxygen sensor. Never had this, luckily
4) brake work. Had this, on my EV.
5) oil changes. Have done them on ICEV and PHEV. N
Re: (Score:2)
This link has a different list of top repairs.
https://www.carmd.com/wp/vehicle-health-index-introduction/2021-carmd-vehicle-health-index/
All of them are only applicable to ICEVs.
The top one is the catalytic converter replacement.
Fuel injectors is on the list, also, at #8. Something I remember having to replace on my 2001 Prius.
That's a list of check ENGINE repairs (Score:2)
That's a list of "check engine" light repairs.
Check ENGINE. The check ENGINE light.
I wonder why they seem to be engine related? :)
Actually the "check engine" light is the "emissions related malfunction" light. So it lights up for things that would increase emissions. What obviously doesn't apply to EVs, because for EVs the emissions are done elsewhere, at the power plant and the battery plant, rather than at the vehicle.
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct. I noticed that after posting. I couldn't find a better source of common repairs besides this and the previous link I posted.
The per mile emissions for EVs may not happen anywhere, assuming renewable power is used for charging.
Battery manufacturing emissions seem to be a small subset of total emissions, though they are higher than for ICEV at manufacturing time.
See https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths #5 .
Re: (Score:2)
Just because *zero* percent of your maintenance has not involved the engine does not make that representative of the amount of time auto mechanics spend on different things.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Seems unlikely from my experience (Score:4, Interesting)
But you're right, EVs still need maintenance. One thing that needs regular attention in our older cars is the aircon. In an EV (depending on the model), the heating / cooling unit is more complex than in an IC car, and more important as well: it ensures the battery remains at the right temperature (plus in winters, you rely on it to get any kind of heat in the cabin). That thing is going to need coolant refills, maintenance on the seals, and compressor or radiator replacements.
Re: (Score:3)
And the major bits, batteries and the motor are basically plug n play replacements, vs an engine or transmission.
20 yr ownership is entirely reasonable to become almost normal for the mechanical pieces. ICEs could never achieve that due to their physics.
Re: Seems unlikely from my experience (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I learned to actually check suspension-related symptoms right away. As it turns out, that bit of wobble was because the A-arm connecting the wheel to the car had broken. It was left connected only by a much smaller bar that's intended to stabilize the alignment.
So much infrastructure needed (Score:4, Insightful)
Some of the latest high speed charging equipment from ABB calls for a charger having a maximum output of 350 kW. Imagine an electric equivalent of a gas station with, say, 10 lanes, where each lane is bumping the power draw up or down 350 kW each time a car starts or stops charging. Scale that up, and you're looking at a +/- 3.5 Megawatt draw for a single station... a variable draw that's plus or minus the output of four 1 Megawatt solar power stations., or about 1/250 to 1/300 the output of a Gigawatt nuclear reactor.
Slower speed chargers don't have quite that draw, but still, imagine a thousand stations spread across several states. Neither our generation capacity, nor our grid, is designed to handle that kind of additional usage beyond existing loads. EVs are a good thing, by and large, but to me the math says we just aren't ready.
Re:So much infrastructure needed (Score:5, Insightful)
EVs top up every night at home. ( High speed charging is only for long distance drivers and people who don't have garages. ) There is so much excess generation capacity at night. So there will be no serious issue of the grid capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
More importantly, as close as we are to maxing the grid without large quantities of EV charging, and with more generating plants closing, we no longer have the massive excess capacity at night much of
ns (Score:2)
I drive a PHEV as well, a 2015 Volt. I get about 30-35 miles out of it, a bit less than the EPA rating, due to living on a steep hill, and always using heat in the winter. I almost never exceed the battery capacity. The "engine maintenance" comes up every few months to burn some gas that's been sitting in the tank unused.
The average US driver drives 39 miles a day. Those driving 150-200 miles a day are very much the exception. And the average accounts for those drivers. If you are driving that many miles ev
Re: (Score:2)
Any more than that and you're willfully living hours away from your job and not at all typical.
Vast majority of drivers do less than 50 per day in total. Perfect for EVs
Re: (Score:2)
What matters is how many people can use it. 66% of Americans with garages can use it. That is a big enough population to create a viable sizeable market. We have not even scratched the surface in meeting their needs. First let is concentrate on people who can use it. By the time we serve significant
Re: (Score:2)
Spot on. There's so much room for growth just by tapping the market of people who can charge at home. Then there's another large chunk of people who can charge at work. We'll get to the people who live can't charge at home *and also* do 200 mile commutes one day, but they're sufficiently nice we don't have to worry about it any time soon. Frankly, I'd say the same of 350kW chargers -- all v nice, but addressing a very much niche need.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Coal is hardly a factor in California, which the article is about . It represented just 2.74% of the CA power mix for 2020, the most recent year I could find data for. Only one coal-fired power plant remains operating in California, the 63-megawatt Argus Cogeneration Plant in Trona (San Bernardino County). CARB would never allow a new coal-fired plant to open in California.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation
When we charge ou
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
An ICE engine loses 60% of the energy as heat and only 40% is used to turn wheels. Whereas an industrial power plant burning diesel converts 90% of the energy into electricity
Try 35% typically although the most efficient turbines in existence will get you 63%
https://www.ge.com/gas-power/p... [ge.com]
4% transmission losses, 1% charging loss and then the electric motors pretty much use all the energy (including regenrative braking energy which ICE cant) so even if you are burning diesel to power your EV you are burning less than if you burned diesel to power your ICE.
There are all kinds of losses ignoring transmission and generation that also have to be accounted for:
AC to DC conversion loses (wall to vehicle charge controller)
Charging losses
Discharging losses
DC to AC conversion losses (to power motors)
This gets you closer to 85% in a modern Tesla.
In real world there are numerous practical considerations that can also significantly affect efficiency such
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need high speed charging for people who don't have garages. I live somewhere that off street parking is rare. The amount of on street charging is increasing. Some dedicated charging stations, others are chargers built into lamp posts.
Solar reduces night capacity (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's some concern about total capacity, but I don't think you will see a concentration of charging stations beyond interstates and enough to service the "oops I forgot to charge and need to head across town" crowd. I "fill up" 2-3 times a week. It costs me about $3 at home or about $30 at a charging station, I obviously try to avoid charging stations whenever possible. In the 9 months of having an electric vehicle, I've charged away from home maybe 12 times. 10 of those were on long trips. I think we'll
Re:So much infrastructure needed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If there is a wildfire nearby, the grid is likely going to be shutdown by the utility for safety, so no charging will be possible. However, most EVs will already be fully charged every night. If the grid suddenly goes down due to a wildfire, and there is a need to evacuate, the biggest trouble is to manually open the garage door to get the car out. That might not apply to ICEs, since many neighbors keep them outdoors and not in the garage. Even then, I have seen a neighbor with a Tesla and an outdoor charge
Re: (Score:2)
> However, most EVs will already be fully charged every night.
I wonder how many people will be put off by EVs after, say, the 3rd or 4th time they forget to plug the car in the day before and don't have enough juice to get to work or the supermarket the next day.
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible to get stranded with any vehicle, ICEV, BEV, even PHEV.
I have been lucky enough never to completely run out of gas or battery in my decades of driving. Perhaps it'll happen some day. But I won't considering changing to a different vehicle technology if it does. I'll be pissed at myself forgetting to fill-up and/or charge.
I have forgotten to plug-in my PHEV at home a few times when the battery was partially depleted. It's not been dramatic, since there was gas in the tank, and I was not stuck a
Re: (Score:2)
I've had EVs since December 2015, and my first EV had a paltry range of just 70 miles in the winter (gen 1 Renault Zoe). I have had no more than three occasions when I woke up without enough charge to do the thing I was supposed to do straight away due to forgetting to charge. And I'm not very organised, as my family and colleagues will attest. I just don't think this is going to be an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Most EV charging is done at night, when the grid is lightly loaded.
Re: (Score:2)
EVs are a good thing, by and large, but to me the math says we just aren't ready.
And we won't be until just before we need to be. It's a gradual, incremental thing but as the demand becomes visible, the supply will be built. This is not going away and the investment will pay off because people will be happy to pay to charge their cars. We have a great example, here, of how market economics will really help things.
Re: (Score:2)
No EVs draw 350kW continuous. At most they draw it for a few minutes. Most don't come close, not least because it's not worth paying for expensive electronics to save a few minutes a year. Most charging is done on AC over a few hours.
In any case, those chargers can balance the load and limit the peak to whatever the site can provide.
Re: (Score:2)
EVs will create decent load at off peak levels, their charging schedule can be very flexible. EVs will improve the grid utilization and improve robustness.
Re:So much infrastructure needed (Score:5, Insightful)
Think again. The average American drives 39 miles a day. Even assuming an efficiency on the low side of 3 miles per kWh, that's just 13 kWh needed per vehicle per day. EVs can all charge at different times of the day, and most are charged with slow chargers, not fast ones. Thus, adding one EV is the equivalent of adding a 541 W continuous load to the grid. I have been driving EVs for over a decade. The number of times I ever needed to use a fast charger is well under 100. Probably under 30.
If all 108 million cars got replaced with EVs, this would add a 58 GW load to the grid.
Last year, the US electric grid capacity was 1,143,757 MW, or 1143 GW. 58 GW is 5% of the total US grid capacity.
While 5% is not a negligible load increase, this is hardly the problem you think it is. There are already load management technologies built into chargers. I have been using that on my 2 Juicebox Pro Pro 40 for 5 years already. This allows the utility to reduce or increase the charging rate depending on grid conditions, on a per second resolution. It is totally painless since it happens overnight, and the cars are still guaranteed to be fully charged in the morning, based on the time I set. And I get a small break on the electric bill for using it, about $80/year rebate. Oh, and BTW, I live on a hill in a drought-stricken area.
The grid infrastructure needed for EVs are not what you think they are. They are not so much with the electric grid distribution or generation, as with installing a sufficient number of slow chargers, where people normally park their cars for long periods of time. The biggest challenge is to install enough chargers for drivers who rent and live in apartments, and at employers.
Re:So much infrastructure needed (Score:4, Interesting)
I didn't validate your numbers, but even at face value the EV charging problem is a little more complicated than you're making it out to be. For one, the grid isn't some homogenous mass upon which power is efficiently transmitted. EV's represent a serious shift in WHERE power is consumed, not just how much. The utility presentations I've seen that detail how the groundwork is being laid for this change are pretty intense. Take something like a local warehouse/logistics center. Right now that facility is probably using the energy equivalent of a typical grocery store. When it switches to EV charging it's going to require power more like what a large shopping mall draws, which is going to necessitate effectively building a new substation to service it. And those facilities tend to co-locate.. you might have 30 of them in a square mile. That's a very significant set of grid upgrades that has to happen. New substations, new mains, additional land that has to be bought... and unfortunately that brings up the second point, which is the power draw is likely to be simultaneous.
The fear in the electric utility industry is that right now, with most of the country using fixed rate electricity and following roughly similar life schedules, that people will come home after work and plug in their vehicles at the same time, basically in sync. That also happens to be the most vulnerable time for the grid, on a daily basis. So you aren't talking about some 5% increase on average in power consumption, you're talking about a much larger percent draw all at once at literally the worst possible time for the grid. Are there technical solutions to that? Sure, you can adopt time of use billing in tandem with mandating chargers that can delay and charge at times more favorable to the grid and the customer. But it doesn't take very many people charging with dumb chargers at 7PM to have major ramifications for reserve capacity... we have to size the grid to meet peak demand not average, it's a throughput issue.
Not only that, but the issue compounds massively when you factor in solar energy. If you have a grid with a high percentage of solar, then the prospect of trying to maintain enough energy storage not just to cover AC load at sunset (which is difficult), but now also continue to shift that produced energy well into the night, is daunting. The modeling I've seen actually has the load curve largely start to smooth out with the electrification of society, such that we get away from "peakiness". This again assumes time of use rates and various load shifting technologies, not just for EV's but all sorts of stuff like cooling and appliances. More consistent load used to be the dream, but with the death of baseload power it's kind of a nightmare now. Really what you want is those vehicles charging at 1pm when the solar output is maximized, but that isn't likely to happen. So you're either building a shitton of batteries to shift that power, or running absurdly expensive peaking gas plants into the night.
The numbers and models I run are just one little corner of a pretty vast and complicated utility industry, but make no mistake that this is going to be an extremely heavy lift.
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks for the detailed response. There are no numbers in it, and I didn't see the utility presentation you saw.
As far as your statement that all the power draw from EV charging is likely to be simultaneous, that absolutely doesn't have to be the case, and it certainly isn't for us. Cars are driven an average of 1-2 hours a day. They are parked for 22-23 hours. Drivers are unlikely to own an EV if they don't have charging available at their home location. The car is likely plugged in at home for 10-12 hours
Re: (Score:2)
1. This is a growth opportunity for the electric utility industry. Weird that it gets presented as a problem for them: they have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get paid to substitute their joules for oil joules. When you consider the wealth of the people who have been paid for oil joules, this ought to have the electric utility industry salivating
2. The electric industry has already gone through multiple spikes in demand, which are often concentrated. 30 years ago, people didn't come home and put the A
Re: (Score:2)
imagine a thousand stations spread across several states.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of EV charging stations!
Maybe (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm old enough to remember when all cars needed periodic tune-ups. I don't recall fuel injection putting many mechanics out of business.
It probably shut down some tune-up places (Score:3)
Toys r Us couldn't survive the
Re: (Score:2)
I have a minimal amount of skill as a mechanic, but I've never been able to properly adjust a carburetor or gap spark plugs correctly. The last time I tried was on my '74 Fiat 128 (lime green!) and I messed it up so bad that it never ran properly until I took it to a mechanic.
I said "minimal".
Most people back in the day took their cars to mechanics for tune-ups. In my life I've only met a hand
Luxury offsets cheaper maintenance (Score:2)
As the West got more and more wealthy, the price of a basic car increased with the purchase power.
===
Results in consequences that basic parts will be replaced with more luxurious and comfortable parts. So the suspension is more complex, crumble zones is more complex, and you get luxurious options for the interior like a actual AC system instead of some fans and a window. Safety also means more redundancy for all parts.
===
All these luxury options and redundancy create more maintenance down the line.
So even i
right-to-repair is an issue (Score:5, Interesting)
The very closed nature of some electric cars, especially Tesla but also others, is a problem for independent repair (and therefore for owners, especially second-hand owners). Getting parts is hard, and getting service gear is hard. That used to be true for combustion vehicles too - remember how BMW, especially, tried to use technology to freeze out independent repair garages? BMW started to introduce custom equipment to reset the service indicator, customised diagnostic buses, and so on - and getting hold of that equipment was very difficult for anyone other than BMW dealers.
Most of this vendor lock-in was removed with the OBD-II standard and regulatory requirements to sell test equipment to independent repair workers, sell parts to them, and permit the manufacture of pattern parts by third party manufacturers. BMW had to stop trying to freeze out independents.
Electric cars have not reached this yet: third-party parts for the electric powertrain are not common, software integration is tight across the entire vehicle and often closed to independent repair, and many vendors are not interested in changing this. They are even less interested in providing component interoperability than combustion vehicle makers.
The claim that combustion engines have far more moving parts and therefore need more servicing is not really true. It is rare that one has to open a modern engine within the first several years of life, and only every few years after that. The engines may have many moving parts, but they are very reliable (as are the gearboxes). Repairs to modern cars are mostly things like body panel damage or corrosion, wheels/brakes/bearings/etc, suspension, interior fitments, lights or other smaller parts, or breakdown of electronic modules. All of these things happen to electric vehicles too. Electric vehicles need fluids replaced too: brake/hydraulic fluid, transmission fluids, battery/motor cooling fluids, etc.
Meanwhile, a modern combustion engine vehicle has dozens of intercommunicating computer modules, an integrated ICE unit, ECU, radar and ultrasonic sensors, cameras, etc - like a modern electric car.
The work for both servicing and fault repair will change, but there will still be plenty of it on a global fleet of mostly electric cars. As long as manufacturers don't lock us all into their own service providers, it can be done by independent mechanics.
Government jobs (Score:2)
various random remarks (Score:2)
- Gradual changes in the mix of jobs does not create hardship. No large fraction of the workforce will be suddenly unemployed. Instead, slowly more people exit the auto repair field than enter it.
Electric vehicles will reach a tipping point in the future where they are better than ICE in all respects, price, range, availability, number of public charge points, etc. However, it will still take many years after that point to retire all existing ICE vehicles. It's going to be a gradual slope away from ICE.
Less maintenance - less workshops (Score:2)
Re:Less maintenance - less workshops (Score:4, Insightful)
EV's are in general low maintenance (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So are internal combustion engines. A few oil changes aside, they run for a few hundred thousand miles with minimal maintenance.
What costs money is things like brakes, tires, suspension components and blinker fluid. All things EVs share.
Re: (Score:2)
Right here [wildcatforums.net]. It's at the auto parts store, right next to the starting fluid [supercheapauto.com.au].
Money is fungible. It will be spent (Score:2)
If I save $1200 on auto repairs, that money *will* be spent elsewhere. On a generator, on a solar battery, on an electric bike, eating out at nice restaurants, eating out at fast food joints.
This is the one of the major beneficial points of capitalism. It relentlessly reallocates capital to more efficient uses. That's why it benefits society over time. You are not wasting money keeping antiquated activities to protect fake jobs. Instead, the money is going to *real* jobs that increase GDP.
Re: (Score:2)
That really doesn't follow. Wealthy people couldn't spend all their money even if they tried. If some expenses go down, it just means they get to keep/save more of their income. Even the average person can choose to save some or all of the excess cash flow freed by lower auto repair costs for rainy days, also, rather than spend it all.
Re: (Score:2)
I won't be around in 5 generations to verify the claim, so no, I wouldn't verify the claim.
But speaking as someone who is currently not working, and living off savings, no, I would definitely not spend the $1200/year savings on other things if I could realize them. And I switched to EVs and realized those maintenance savings many years ago already, so there are no further savings to be had.
Re: (Score:2)
Self Driving reduces cars on the road (Score:2)
Last time I checked (Score:2)
We need less jobs and more workers
This has been happening for a while (Score:2)
It's hard to find a mechanic that really knows how to diagnose and fix an engine when they can't plug a computer into it. Good luck finding one that understands the inner workings of a carburetor.
When doesnâ(TM)t technology transform the wor (Score:2)
Hardly a brilliant observation. When dishwashers, laundry machines, and vacuums arrived, so began the decline of jobs devoted to the cleaning of homes. Cars destroyed the horse and carriage industry. Airplanes destroyed the passenger ship industry. Computers destroyed huge swaths of jobs, not to mention robots and manufacturing.
What about auto dealerships already being threatened by the advent of cars being sold by the manufacturer?
Everything changes. Jobs will be lost but others will be created. On balance
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly a brilliant observation. When dishwashers, laundry machines, and vacuums arrived, so began the decline of jobs devoted to the cleaning of homes. Cars destroyed the horse and carriage industry. Airplanes destroyed the passenger ship industry. Computers destroyed huge swaths of jobs, not to mention robots and manufacturing.
What about auto dealerships already being threatened by the advent of cars being sold by the manufacturer?
Everything changes. Jobs will be lost but others will be created. On balance, we find ourselves having to create new work for the workforce every day.
It's interesting people take for granted as some kind of natural law the worlds reserve labor force will always be kept in some kind of rough equilibrium with labor demand.
It isn't at all clear to my why this must always be the case especially once "dead labor" is able to do most jobs. If this situation remains the case forever one can only imagine how far GINI coefficients would have to be driven up in order to bankroll such a reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Build then with robots, fix them with robots, (Score:2)
So... let's imagine that Tesla were to make a truck. And it's autonomously driven.
A Model S somewhere registers that it's time for maintenance. The telemetry of the car has cataloged a list of all the issues registered by the sensors. Also, since the last service, Tesla has designed new sensors which should be installed in the car as there were issues that weren't being detected earlier. Also, the owner of this car has registered that they keep a baby seat for ages newborn - 18 months
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any data on the rate of failure in electric motors in electric vehicles ? I couldn't find any. I know many EV drivers, and have never heard of a motor failure, but it may just be too early.
EVs have batteries that can fail, or will need replacement over time. Charging systems can fail as well, and those components aren't present in ICEs.
My husband's 2017 Bolt EV had a battery capacity issue in 2019. Part of the battery pack was replaced. Then, the entire battery pack was recalled for fire, and wa
Re: (Score:2)
I have yet to hear of an electric motor failure in an EV. Yes, this is anecdotal evidence, but electric motors are extremely simple with far fewer moving parts than an IC engine. It has one part that sits there, one part that spins, perhaps some gearing, and that's pretty much it. No valves, no fuel lines, no manifolds, no spark plugs, no glow plugs, no exhaust/emissions systems.
If you look at electric motors as a whole, they do fail, yes, that is a given... but usually it is something else that fails.