Government Opens $2.5 Billion For EV Chargers In Rural and Underserved Areas (arstechnica.com) 303
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Today, the federal government's Joint Office of Energy and Transportation opened up applications for a $2.5 billion program to expand electric vehicle charging infrastructure in underserved communities. The Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program was authorized along with the $5 billion National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. For starters, the Joint Office is making $700 million available for EV chargers -- but also other alternative fuels including hydrogen and natural gas.
The CFI program actually encompasses two discrete $1.25 billion grant programs. The first is for community charging and fueling grants in both urban and rural areas, particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods as well as neighborhoods with a low ratio of private parking. The other half of the money is for the alternative fuel corridor grants, which will fund the deployment of EV chargers and other alternative fuel infrastructure along designated alternative fuel corridors. "It's critical that we build a national charging network that provides EV drivers with the right type of charging in the right location -- whether that's high-powered charging on highway corridors and in urban hubs or Level 2 charging where EV drivers or riders live, work, and play," said Joint Office Executive Director Gabe Klein. "By working with cities and communities through the CFI Program to get this mix right, we can ensure that everyone has convenient and affordable access to riding and driving electric."
The CFI program actually encompasses two discrete $1.25 billion grant programs. The first is for community charging and fueling grants in both urban and rural areas, particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods as well as neighborhoods with a low ratio of private parking. The other half of the money is for the alternative fuel corridor grants, which will fund the deployment of EV chargers and other alternative fuel infrastructure along designated alternative fuel corridors. "It's critical that we build a national charging network that provides EV drivers with the right type of charging in the right location -- whether that's high-powered charging on highway corridors and in urban hubs or Level 2 charging where EV drivers or riders live, work, and play," said Joint Office Executive Director Gabe Klein. "By working with cities and communities through the CFI Program to get this mix right, we can ensure that everyone has convenient and affordable access to riding and driving electric."
Gas stations (Score:2)
The bulk of that money is going to go to Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips. Gilbarco, Wayne, and Tokheim.
A wonderful time for them to be alive.
Re: (Score:3)
Retrofit chargers into existing infra (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the poles are already in the ground & already wired with electric supply
Wired with thick enough wires to carry the current required by a few light bulbs - typically the total is 1kW or less. Enabling an EV charger on a light pole means pulling thick cables through the streets. The existing wiring - potentially a LOT of it back to the nearest substation - might as well not be there, because it's gonna need to be replaced.
Re: (Score:2)
An EV can be charged off a simple level 1 charger. It might take forever, but if plugs are everywhere - does it matter?
The recharge rate is slow - about 3-5mph.
It'll never work! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know you are joking but some of the "premium" EVs from the likes of BMW and Jaguar actually pipe fake engine noise into the cabin, because apparently people want that.
Re: (Score:2)
EBike and Scooter Chargers, Emergancy Chargers (Score:2)
Silicon Valley we just had a major power outage. About 1/3 of Silicon Valley had no power. It might have helped people if there were charging stations for emergency power, in various places.
because of course (Score:2)
...it's poor and "underserved" communities that will pay the what, 20%? premium for an ev of any kind vs an ICE vehicle?
Do we even HAVE a used ev market yet? (Not to say that government policies haven't annihilated the used car market generally...)
Frankly, I'd guess most people living in such places would be happier with a decent grocery store.
Re: because of course (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The point isn't where we're getting the money. The point is priorities and WHY this is important enough to dedicate use of finite resources.
The point here seems to be to spend money on a boutique option with the moral justification that 'it's green'. Does it make sense to spend excess $ for bespoke options when these places don't even have BASIC services?
What's next, subsidizing 'poor and underserved neighborhoods' so they can get organic soy lattes? So they can be served by green energy sources?
Gas stations are still subsidized (Score:3)
Gas stations still receive preferential tax treatment, such as bonus depreciation.
let's be realistic (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Wow, where to start. So much wrong in your post I'm not sure where to begin.
Ok, first off for background I own a Tesla and a gas guzzler so I don't have a particular bias here. Love both cars.
EVs can not take over general transport without some serious technology changes. Where is the lithium coming for all,the batteries? And the rest of the rare earths needed? Right now known reserves in the ground are simply insufficient. Something has to change.
EVs do not take 2 hours to charge. You're either char
Re:Class warfare and privilege at its finest (Score:5, Informative)
You know some of us on here actually own and use EVs, right? And not just Teslas either.
My little EV (a Renault Zoe) has a range of 245miles in the summer and 200 in the winter*. Would I like more? Sure, but it's hardly a deal breaker. I drive more than 200 miles like four times a year, so on those journeys I use my meal stop to charge the car. And plenty of Norwegians drive a Zoe, and it gets really really cold in Norway in the winter.
* Yes, that includes running the heating. There's no separate heating for the battery on a Zoe.
My battery is likely to last longer than the chassis of the car. Maths as follows: battery will be at about 80% SoH (state of health, range) after about 750 full charge-discharge cycles. So that's about 150k miles at 220miles average per cycle, allowing for a decrease over the period. At that time, I'll be getting 160 miles in winter and 190 to 200 in summer, which is probably still good enough, really. When does that happen? I've had the car nearly 3 years and driven it 12,000 miles, so I'm doing 4,000 miles a year (range is unchanged in that time, by the way, still 245 miles in summer and 200 in winter. But I'm sure it will go down at some point). So at this rate, it'll be 37.5 years before I get to 150k miles. Hence why I say, the battery will outlast the chassis.
As for charging: when I need to, about every 10 days or so, I just plug it in overnight. I don't faff about trying to charge to 80%. I let it charge to 100%. The battery management system takes care of the rest.
My experience is utterly normal for people who have EVs. They're just routine now. Not a big deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Last year the flights were cheaper out of a neighboring city so it was worth it to me to drive 4 hours to that airport. I'm not even sure how I would have planned that trip with an EV, better tip planner says I would need to make two charging stops both with a Model 3 and a Leaf. It would have been 5 hours 8 minutes with a Mod
Re: Class warfare and privilege at its finest (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least half across the country with every vehicle I have owned, the thing is even if I do it once every 4-5 years that means I need a vehicle that can do it without being a delay.
Oh my goooooood
Re:Class warfare and privilege at its finest (Score:5, Insightful)
The average distance driven in the US per day is indeed larger than in the UK, but it's not 26 times longer. It's 1.5 times: 30 miles instead of 20. I'm sure it's higher still in rural areas, and I'm sure some people need to drive much further, but a vanishingly small fraction of rural Americans are routinely driving more than 300 miles daily. And if it's under 300 miles, you can do the vast bulk of your daily charging at home.
Yes, there is an edge case of a once-in-four-years 10 hour drive, and yes, that's often for *the* important trip, and yes, for some people like you that's a showstopper. But -- it won't be close to being a showstopper for everyone, even in rural America:
- Some people will swallow the extra two hours of charging once every four years for the other benefits of an EV
- Some will use an ICE car they also own (about 60% of US families have more than one car, after all)
- Some will rent an ICE car or an EV with a super-long range / super-fast charging / both, for that one journey
- Some will fly instead (here in Europe, we can also take the train)
Now, I know you don't want to do any of those things. I know you are affronted by the very idea that you should have to. That's fine. But by the same token, I am affronted by many things about ICE vehicles, like going to gas stations instead of charging at home, sitting in fumes from your own vehicle, putting up with the noise and the smell and the vibrations, damaging the lungs of people around me including my kids, adding a lot more carbon to the atmosphere through driving than I need to, coping with non-linear and slow-to-respond acceleration, etc etc. And lots of people feel the way you do, and an increasing number feel the way I do. That's all fine. Just part of how humanity works. However, the s-curve of adoption for this tech looks preemuch like the s-curves of other tech, so I think EVs are going to win out, and with a speed that will surprise lots of people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am affronted by many things about ICE vehicles, like going to gas stations instead of charging at home, sitting in fumes from your own vehicle, putting up with the noise and the smell and the vibrations
It takes 5 minutes to get to the gas staion, and I'm there for less than six minutes. This happens once a week. As for the sitting in fumes and smell (and most of the vibration) -- apparently your car is badly broken! You should get it repaired before you poison yourself. Perhaps you are already experimenting brain damage from carbon monoxide poisoning.
When I ride in EVs (a few times a week) they seem a tiny bit quieter, but not so much that I would notice either way if music is playing at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I realised I didn't talk about your point about Zoe payback periods. I honestly don't know. I'm not particularly price sensitive. My first Zoe was a bargain -- £150 per month all in, including charging / service etc, for a brand new car. I had it three years. That was £5.4k over that period. I can't imagine that any new small ICE family hatchback would have been cheaper, never mind one with a comparable trim. My latest Zoe is now £400 per month, so a lot more, but then it's a lot nicer, go
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll be getting 160 miles in winter and 190 to 200 in summer, which is probably still good enough, really. When does that happen? I've had the car nearly 3 years and driven it 12,000 miles, so I'm doing 4,000 miles a year
I live in the Washington, D.C. area, and typically drive 21,000 miles a year. (The commute alone is 25 miles each way, five days a week. Kids, shopping, etc. is about 16 miles a day. On the weekends its about 50 miles.) This does not include any visits family that lives 50 miles away, or 1,000 mile road trips. Friends of mine who have much smaller commutes are about 12,000 miles per year.
Apparently things are very different in Norway.
So, yes, 200 miles a day is reasonable.
But it's a lot more miles per year.
Re: (Score:2)
For the cold the ability to pre-heat the car remotely is fantastic. Back when I used to commute I had it on a timer, so when I came out in the morning it was already fully de-iced and nice and warm inside.
Fossil fuel vehicles can't do it because the 12V battery doesn't have enough energy, and running the engine unattended is dangerous because of the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. Yeah, I know there are some special ones that can plug in for this purpose, but it's pretty much standard on EVs.
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:5, Informative)
This feels exactly arse-over-tit. A higher proportion of rural dwellings have off-street parking, so can have home charging, meaning that rural dwellers can start each day with 200 to 400 miles of range, depending on the EV. And while I'm sure some rural dwellers are routinely driving more than that, I'm also sure most are not. So most rural dwellers would never normally need to even use a charger away from home. And they may well have outbuildings or even spare ground for a solar array, which would cut their opex dramatically if they can raise the capital.
I don't understand the reliability point at all: ICE cars have lower reliability rates than EVs, reflecting their much greater complexity. The things that go wrong on an EV tend to be mechanical things that also exist on ICE cars, not the battery with no moving parts or the ultra-reliable motors.
Re: (Score:2)
ICE cars have lower reliability rates than EVs, reflecting their much greater complexity. The things that go wrong on an EV tend to be mechanical things that also exist on ICE cars, not the battery with no moving parts or the ultra-reliable motors.
Tell that to the F150 Lightning.
Re: (Score:2)
There's only been about 15k F150 Lightnings sold, out of 10m+. So that's a Ford F150L issue, not an EV issue. It also doesn't seem right to characterise a product recall with no customers known to be affected as a reliability issue. It's a major fuckup, no doubt, but the common understanding of a reliability issue for an EV is along the lines of "the traction battery stopped working after a couple of years" or "the regen has stopped and I can only use the physical brakes".
Re: (Score:2)
Well we are talking about Ford here.
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent point. The money might be much better spent on establishing charging points for apartment dwellers in cities who have to use either apartment parking lots or on-street parking.
Re: (Score:2)
Am I the only one who read the headline as "undeserved areas"?
Re: (Score:2)
That is a good point too, it does not just say rural areas. Still the focus does seem to be on the conventional gas station model, with a central station that people drive to and charge their car while they wait rather than simply where they park.
Re: (Score:2)
The money might be much better spent on establishing charging points for apartment dwellers
TFS: "both urban and rural areas, particularly in [...] neighborhoods with a low ratio of private parking."
TFA: "communities with high concentrations of multi-unit dwellings."
Re: (Score:2)
Right, but are they talking about providing the charging where people actually park, or are they simply pursuing the gas station model where you bring your car temporarily to a lot for charging, wait around for it to charge, then drive it home? I think the former would probably be better than the latter, although you do need some of the latter. Overall, it does not sound like they've actually worked out the specifics. Rather they will take applications for projects and make grants based on the applications
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You'd think the self-sufficient crowd would be all over EVs. Can't make petrol at home, but you can make your own electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't make petrol at home, but you can make your own electricity.
You sure can make your own ethanol at home for flex-fuel vehicles and getting a license for a fuel still is not terribly complex. You sure can also make your own biodiesel at home also, and for various reasons (inter alia ethanol doesn't store well as a fuel) that's way more popular with the self-sufficiency crowd. What you can't (easily) make at home is lubricants and antifreeze.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Along these lines, I idly wonder if Musk was trying to appeal to a new potential customer group with all his flexes on Twitter. If so, it doesn't seem to have been very successful.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no of course not. It’s the same crowd who flies “don’t tread on me flags” and demands the government do something about the gays, drag queens, and women seeking abortions.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't that be more than offset by the fact that EVs are so simple though?
No exhaust system, no spark plugs, no fuel injection, no pumps, no belts, no alternator, no radiator, no oil etc.
Some EVs are actually pretty simple and relatively easy to work on. You can DIY one too, e.g. Jerry Rig Everything on YouTube is converting a Hummer to EV. His videos are interesting because they show just how relatively simple it is to do, using off-the-shelf parts for all the electrical stuff and drive motor.
As a bonus
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It really depends on how rural is "rural." A lot of EVs are built for efficiency, and some of those design decisions make them less well suited for unpaved roads.
Also, EVs are still more expensive, and rural areas tend to have lower incomes. Lack of a good inventory of cheap used EVs is probably a big reason there aren't as many out there. I'm guessing that for rural residents where EVs make sense financially and otherwise would welcome them, since a 50 mile drive to the grocery store would be a lot cheaper
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:5, Informative)
memory_register wrote, regarding rural people and EVs
Because they do not. And not because there are no chargers. The do not drive EVs because EVs do not have the rage or reliability needed outside of safe places like cities.
I grew up in a rural community. What I find really interesting is what people find to be a small rural town these days is equivalent to what I would have considered a small city. Most of the people I encounter who think they're from a small rural town still seem to have had the choice of several gas stations and at least one supermarket. Technically, we were right next to a big town. Our farm was right on the river and my sister would swim one of her horses across the river and ride around on the golf course sometimes, but there wasn't a bridge, so you had to go all the way around to the nearest bridge if you wanted to do anything in town. It was not as far as some rural communities are from the nearest big town, but the point is that, if you needed to fuel your car, you couldn't do it in town. If you drove home and you were low on fuel, you could not get back out again, so you had to be careful. What we did have though, was electricity.
So, mileage may vary, but I think that a lot of rural people, for whom fuel supply may be logistics problem, might actually be quite happy with EVs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed that people in the UK tend to vastly over-estimate distances, by a factor of 2 or more. Back when I had an original Leaf, one with a little 24kWh battery and 100 mile range, they would ask if I could get as far as the next city over, 20 miles away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Charging statioins in rural areas are not for rural people who live in those areas. They're for the travelers cruising down the highway, so they can stop in that little town at the 7-11 (or similar) and spend 20 minutes charging, grabbing snacks and coffee, and relieve themselves, and then get back on the road and continue their journey.
Rural folk who own EVs charge them at home. We only need to use public chargers when we are away from home, cruising down the highway.
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:4, Funny)
The math is pretty clear. Current technology simply can not support a world of EVs.
Damn! It too bad we aren't looking for any new technology, isn't it. I wonder why nobody is looking for new battery technology. /s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The math is pretty clear. Current technology simply can not support a world of EVs.
Damn! It too bad we aren't looking for any new technology, isn't it. I wonder why nobody is looking for new battery technology. /s
By all means continue looking for that magic fairy dust. Who knows, maybe even you'll find it. But please demonstrate an actual working solution (as in, *actually operating*, in, you know, the real world - not "some lab somewhere came to the conclusion that it just might not be absolutely impossible") BEFORE you destroy existing infrastructure through stupid legislation.
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:5, Informative)
In the admittedly unlikely event that you're one of the few people on Slashdot who's willing to change their mind when presented with new evidence, here's a link to a thread with sources showing that this is not the case for Li supply and demand.
https://twitter.com/AukeHoekst... [twitter.com]
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:5, Informative)
With which supply of lithium are these hundreds of millions of EV vehicles going to be built?
The math is pretty clear. Current technology simply can not support a world of EVs.
The materials don't exist in sufficient quantity.
Well, if the math is pretty clear, then I guess that's it for EVs. I certainly respect people who make a good mathematical argument... when they can show the math. Which I note you haven't. Just saying: "The math is pretty clear." is not the same as actually having any supporting math. Not to mention that, for any of it to make sense you have to actually demonstrate that lithium really is in short supply. To put things in perspective, on car battery pack takes about 16 kg of lithium. mining produced something like 100K tons of lithium in 2021, which is enough for about 6.25 million car battery packs. There were around 80 million cars produced in 2021, so that means that lithium production would need to go up to about 1.28 million tons for every car to be an electric. In the long term, you could worry that lithium will run out, but we will inevitably start recycling it from used car batteries at end of life, which we will call about 15 years for EVs. So, that means that we need 19.2 million tons of minable lithium. At the moment, there are about 21 million tons of lithium that are immediately and economically extractable by today's mining methods, according to the USGS, with another 65 million tons that could potentially be mined in the near term. So, it sounds like, from the point of usage in EV batteries, we're fine. As for methods other than today's mining methods, there are massive, if dilute supplies of lithium in the oceans. Hundreds of billions of tons. Current lithium costs are about $50 per kilogram, down from a peak of $85 per kilogram and current methods of extracting lithium from seawater use about $2 of electricity per kg. There are other costs, of course, but it certainly looks like we have a supply of lithium sufficient to permanently supply our electric vehicle needs without any serious rise in cost.
So, where are your numbers?
P.S. the assumption that we will need lithium is a bit premature. Lithium is great, of course. It's very low density, and its reactivity make it a good material for light car batteries. It is not the only possible choice though. If it got too expensive, we could trade off weight for price. There's some pretty promising graphene aluminum ion battery tech in the wings, not to mention the potential of aluminum-air batteries with far higher energy density than lithium-ion. Lithium could end up just being a phase in EV battery technology.
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, forgot about all of the small modular reactors that are super cheap to build, reprocess spent fuel, produce virtually no waste, require barely any maintenance, make meltdowns and other runaway criticality events impossible and fulfill the promise of "too cheap to meter". Any day now.... Any day.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm happy to sue your numbers.
By your numbers, we have enough to build EVs for a few years. And then what?
Going to recycle it forever? No.
And what about the rare earths that go into an EV which mostly come from China?
Btw, it doesn't matter much because there are other things going on but 15 years is not a reasonable figure for a battery pack.
I run my Tesla exactly according to their battery life recommendations without fail. I'm super ocd about it, I got it late 2019. It was 310 miles at 100%. Now it i
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:5, Funny)
The materials don't exist in sufficient quantity.
he stated confidently, repeating the well and truly debunked peak oil myth of the 60s about an element far more abundant in the world than oil. Perplexed onlookers were left to wonder what ever made him choose the username iAmWaySmarterThanYou despite iAmDunningKruger being a far more appropriate choice.
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Another perspective is that the more EVs on the road, the less fossil fuels diverted from equipment that still has to be gas powered.
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Re:Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:4, Insightful)
You'ce never ridden a horse, have you?
You can refuel a petrol-fueled car in a lot less time than you can refuel a horse, and the maximum speed and range are vastly better. In the US, the Pony Express coast-to-coast mail service still took ten days, switching horses every station (8 to 40 km apart, 190 in total) and averaging 120 km of travel per day. It was heavily subsidized and still went bankrupt in 18 months because it was a terrible model for transport, even before the telegraph destroyed its competitive advantage.
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:3)
His point is that when gas cars started being available, refueling was a pain in the ass because the infrastructure was not there. It's only much easier today because of all the gas stations that got built.
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, it was a gob-smackingly ignorant and stupid point. You could have just admitted "no, I've never ridden a horse and have no idea what I'm talking about".
Before there were filling stations, people bought automobile fuel from other kinds of stores and filled up cans. The early infrastructure then -- call it a "minimum viable product" for fueling -- was a lot simpler than what electric cars require. The Model T got 21 mpg (later cars accepted lower fuel efficiency for other features, given the development of fueling stations), which means a 5 gallon can gave a pretty good range.
On the other side of the comparison, a typical horse can only go 25-35 miles in a day with a rider, then needs to eat and rest overnight. Its walking speed is a lot lower than a car's, and if you only have grass feed -- rather than calorically dense food like grains (or modern pellets) -- then long rides day after day will make it lose weight.
So, even before we factor in cargo capacity, automobiles with internal combustion engines needed barely any infrastructure to be more usable than horses.
The AC also totally ignored the core claim of the OP: that the reason rural people generally do not use EVs is "not because there are no chargers", but other reasons that have nothing to do with how much infrastructure is built out.
So, yeah, the point was just like most points made by EV apologists: factually ignorant and failing to engage with the actual criticism.
Re: (Score:2)
The weird thing about this debate is EVs don't really need infrastructure. There's already electricity infrastructure and especially in rural areas everyone can just charge at home.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Considering insurance companies pretty much demand an upgrade from 60A service before they'll provide coverage
Citation needed. Several of my neighbors are on 60A service and have no problem insuring their 100+ year old homes. Many still have knob-and-tube wiring. My home was on 100A when I bought it, but it had been upgraded from 60A only recently in order to install central AC, and still had a couple of knob-and-tube runs. The service would have been overloaded if I had added any high-amp circuit without an upgrade.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, EVs require no infrastructure. Nobody ever stays overnight away from their home, or drives more than ~100 miles from their house (and then back home) in a day. And 240V split-phase, high-current service doesn't count as infrastructure. These things are especially true in rural areas. And I have a bridge that is a truly excellent investment opportunity.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to call finding some store that stocked gasoline as "minimum viable product" then by the same standard EVs have that too: plug into a random 110V outlet at home and have poor charging but enough. For a couple hundred dollars for most rural homes, add a 220V and you got something *way* more convenient than early days of gas cars, and for 95% of private driving, you'd never even bother with any shared charging station.
Range is the other gripe. Ok, fine, for road trips it sucks and the only remed
Re: (Score:2)
Haha the good old days were never as rosy as they seem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While pulling a yacht up a mountain pass!
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
This article is one of many many examples of folks doing exactly what you say, fixing the current inconveniences.
For a lot of driving scenarios, EVs are already more convenient. I don't have a gas pump at home, but I do have a plug. For my daily drive, I have a quiet and powerful ride that I never have to visit a gas station for.
Road tripping would be a different matter, but for a lot of people that is a rare scenario. Given more infrastructure, current tech would mean having to stop every 3 hours or so
Re: (Score:2)
My prime minister is going to block sales of 1/3 of the usual volume of ICEs in 2026. I hope the inconveniences are fixed before then.
Re: (Score:2)
In what car does a charge take 20 minutes? That assumes you can drive right up to a high speed charger without waiting at one of the two stops. Check Fredericton to Halifax in a trip planner.
My prime minister is going to block sales of 1/3 of the usual volume of ICEs in 2026. I hope the inconveniences are fixed before then.
New Hyundais can charge to 80% in https://www.hyundai.com/worldw...
Re: (Score:2)
Good job on mangling that link slashdot https://www.hyundai.com/worldw... [hyundai.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
Hence the topic here of adding more stations. If you have more stations, then that addresses the relative uncertainty of an open stall. Just like number of gas stations being constrained results in unbearably long lines when something impacts the gas supply chain. Complaining about an article concerning adding stations being silly when EVs are too unreliable to find an available station is weird .
If that road trip is every 3 months, then I wouldn't begrudge an extra hour of downtime along the way too much
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you driving cross country instead of flying if you’re in such a hurry?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This article is one of many many examples of folks doing exactly what you say, fixing the current inconveniences.
For a lot of driving scenarios, EVs are already more convenient. I don't have a gas pump at home, but I do have a plug. For my daily drive, I have a quiet and powerful ride that I never have to visit a gas station for.
Road tripping would be a different matter, but for a lot of people that is a rare scenario. Given more infrastructure, current tech would mean having to stop every 3 hours or so for 20 minutes. Admittedly somewhat longer than most gas stations, but within reach of reasonable.
You mean for 20 minutes of charging, and 2 hours in queue before a charger becomes available?
Re: Do you think rural people drive EVs (Score:2)
If only there was an article about adding more charging stations aiming precisely to address that concern you just mentioned...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Given more infrastructure, current tech would mean having to stop every 3 hours or so for 20 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There simply isn't enough grid capacity, non-Chinese environmentally-friendly produced lithium, etc. to do these EV initiatives.
I keep seeing these claims, like it's all coming from the same source. Why don't you go ahead and prove it. Actually show the numbers. How much lithium do we need to go to all EV and how much is available? Then we can check if your numbers actually match reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha ha! When did they remove you from the ass end of the centipede?
Re: (Score:2)
The good thing about EVs is it doesn't really matter. Even power from a coal plant is cleaner than a gas engine in a car since it has controls and filters that just wouldn't be practical in a vehicle. Then there's another benefit that you can add renewable or cleaner sources to the grid and all the vehicles already on the road benefit. Rather than replacing 2 million vehicles, you can replace 1 power plant. Other alternatives are basically just different power storage options, electric drive trains will
Re: (Score:3)
More like 20K to install a solar panel setup that should be able to keep your car charged for 20-30 years, during which time the average person will spend $42K to $63K on gas. Sounds like a pretty good deal actually.