How Obama should spend a big green energy fund

[GRA]

From Jim Motavalli at Plugincars.com:

http://www.plugincars.com/if-obama-gets-another-big-green-energy-fund-what-should-he-do-it-126492.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[adric22]

I think if there were billions available to spend, it should be put into L2 and L3 charging stations... preferably a 90/10 mix.

Just imagine if every major city had around 40 quick charge stations, and hundreds of L2 stations.

I could think of many ways to really squeeze the most out of such funds too. for example, any place that is to offer free charging should use a "dumb" EVSE so there is no need for a card and maintenance costs would drop significantly.

With this charging infrastructure in place, it would eliminate the chicken/egg problem.

 

[planet4ever]

If you are going to start down that road let me say that for every person like you, you will find 10,000 Americans who think he should provide free gas stations before he provides free electric stations. My opinion? Public charging stations should never be free. (What Tesla is doing is OK; you paid for the charging when you bought the car.)

Ray

 

[TonyWilliams]

If you are going to start down that road let me say that for every person like you, you will find 10,000 Americans who think he should provide free gas stations before he provides free electric stations. My opinion? Public charging stations should never be free. (What Tesla is doing is OK; you paid for the charging when you bought the car.)

Ray

^^^^ agree 100%

 

[adric22]

If you are going to start down that road let me say that for every person like you, you will find 10,000 Americans who think he should provide free gas stations before he provides free electric stations. My opinion? Public charging stations should never be free. (What Tesla is doing is OK; you paid for the charging when you bought the car.)

Are you talking about free stations, or free fuel?

I'm not suggesting the fuel be free. I'm suggesting the stations be paid for. Some of those stations will be free. This is not much different then how it has already worked with Blink stations. For example, Kohls put in blink stations that are free to use. Now, I'm not sure whether they paid for those or Uncle Sam paid for them. But the point I was making about "dumb" EVSEs is that if some company is going to opt for chargers, where they intend to allow people (customers, employees, etc) to charge for free, then they should use a "dumb" EVSE as it is much less expensive and much more reliable.

As for gas stations. we have plenty of gas stations. And the government giving away gas "stations" will not help anybody unless you happen to be a business owner who got a free station. Anyone pulling in for gas would still have to pay just like every one else.

Now.. I only brought this up because somebody asked what we thought should be done if some giant "big green energy" fund were to suddenly become available. Obviously this entire discussion is theoretical. I just brought up the point that IF we are going to spend a bunch of money promoting green energy, installing extra infrastructure for EVs would be better use of that money than, say, increasing the federal tax incentives on EVs. because ultimately, we need the infrastructure for mainstream adoption. But if you reduce the price of the cars, sure.. you'll sell a bunch more cars until the money runs out. But after the money is gone, we'd still be stuck with no infrastructure and high priced cars that nobody wants because there is nowhere to charge them.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Interesting article on how charger congestion is quickly becoming an out of control problem:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11846531/1/charger-congestion-a-problem-for-electric-cars.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Given that using the money to reduce the deficit would be an immensely unpopular suggestion in this forum, I'd suggest some scheme where the public funding is amplified by private investment. There may be some businesses, malls and restaurants come to mind, that could be on the verge of making some investments and some incentive could push them along.

 

[ERG4ALL]

I was just reading the February 25th edition of Time Magazine and came across an article titled, "The Most Expensive Weapon Ever Built" http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2136312,00.html. It was referring to the F-35 fighter jet, which a Marine spokesman said, "The aircraft is not operational". The article goes on to state that, "More than a decade into its development, blueprints are changing about 10 times a day, seven days a week." So what has this cost us taxpayers? $400,000,000,000! That's right, four hundred billion dollars for a plane that is being rapidly overtaken by pilotless drone technology.
This got me to thinking and I invite you to take a stab at one of your favorite civilian projects to put that into perspective. There are many infrastructure projects that would also be worthy. The point of this is perspective. According to Carlos Ghosn, the CEO of Nissan, he said that the main reason EVs are not being rapidly adopted is because the charging infrastructure is not there and needs to be built.
Somewhere I found a figure that indicated that the QC equipment costs about $20,000. It turns out that we have, 47,182 miles of interstate highway as of 2010. By doing the arithmetic it turns out that for $400 billion we could have an expensive charger every 12-1/2 feet throughout our interstate system! Of course it would make more sense to have a dozen or so chargers every 10 miles and use the rest to put lower cost, i.e. $2,000 chargers at motels, theaters, etc. We could subsidize restaurants along the Interstate to put in QC units. We could go coast-to-coast entirely on electricity. Interesting noodling.
And remember this is not the entire Defense Budget, this is just for one plane! Kind of puts things in perspective.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

You don't have to sell me, there's tons of fat that can be cut. That's why the sequester is a good thing.

 

[mwalsh]

You don't have to sell me, there's tons of fat that can be cut. That's why the sequester is a good thing.

Unless it wrecks the still fragile economy. :?

 

[Smidge204]

You don't have to sell me, there's tons of fat that can be cut. That's why the sequester is a good thing.

Because the best way to lose weight isn't adding a morning jog to your daily routine, it's amputating your legs. :roll:
=Smidge=

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Because the best way to lose weight isn't adding a morning jog to your daily routine, it's amputating your legs. :roll:
=Smidge=

If everything else has failed and you are in danger of dying from a stroke maybe it is. Trips to the fridge will be a lot harder.

 

[Smidge204]

If everything else has failed and you are in danger of dying from a stroke maybe it is. Trips to the fridge will be a lot harder.

To stretch this analogy, being immobile is generally the antithesis to staying in shape. As long as surgery is on the table, there's always gastric bands, stomach staples or liposuction.

Basically using the money from oil/gas field land leases for anything other than reducing dependence on oil and gas is not only a waste of time and money, it's incredibly dangerous in the long term economically, environmentally and politically. Some additional EV infrastructure and tax credits are a good start but I'd personally like to see more efforts on renewable energy sources and general infrastructure improvements.
=Smidge=

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I think if there were billions available to spend, it should be put into L2 and L3 charging stations... preferably a 90/10 mix.

Just imagine if every major city had around 40 quick charge stations, and hundreds of L2 stations.

I could think of many ways to really squeeze the most out of such funds too. for example, any place that is to offer free charging should use a "dumb" EVSE so there is no need for a card and maintenance costs would drop significantly.

With this charging infrastructure in place, it would eliminate the chicken/egg problem.

well, i think just putting in stations everywhere will result in the exact same thing we have with all the other federally funded programs that mismanage funds.

ask Tony or any pilot about details but we have towns getting a ton of money to keep an airport open with other airports near by and that airport gets very little if any traffic while other regions have to shut down their only airport for miles due to lack of funding.

i think the infrastructure should be based on EV population up to say 40 DCFCs per metro area. this would encourage fleet sales by cities and counties to boost the numbers and we charge for charging (ya, couldnt help that ) and the money is collected by a utility (because they have the highest rate of collection. so ya, its pay your EV charging bill or live in the dark...your choice)

and when i say 40 DCFCs, i mean locations not plugs. as the demand increases, additional units in one location would be needed

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

If you are going to start down that road let me say that for every person like you, you will find 10,000 Americans who think he should provide free gas stations before he provides free electric stations. My opinion? Public charging stations should never be free. (What Tesla is doing is OK; you paid for the charging when you bought the car.)

Ray

ok then, how about fourty bucks?

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/21/estonia-officially-opens-nationwide-ev-fast-charging-network/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[freddms]

Where the thinking is wrong here is we are not losing our legs.

The sequester cuts $1.2 to $1.5 trillion dollars, drum roll please -- over 10 years. It's a joke.

We are spending $3.5 trillion dollars a year (plus or minus a few hundred billion). And, our revenues are around $2.5 trillion (again, +/- a hundred billion - who really knows). So the entire 10 year sequester implemented in ONE year would still require the government to use credit cards!!! Again, a complete joke.

On a yearly basis, the cuts would be around $100 billion a year (the slop in the budget but surely not slop to the people that will be let go at companies working on government contracts). Still, less than a few percent of the total Federal budget on a yearly basis!!! And, that's if the bozos in Washington don't increase spending next year and completely negate the already small cuts from the sequester.

So an analogy comparing spending cuts to body parts should be more like, "The sequester cuts are like trimming your toe nails - which will grow back." It's NOTHING like cutting off any body part!

More on topic, we should get Washington out of the Electric Car business. The ONLY thing government money will do is MISDIRECT good money into where it makes no sense. You (and maybe me) think more charging stations are the ticket -- but we need to let people with money willing to invest in them take that risk. Go get a loan and install one of these and see if it's profitable. Or, go sell a business the idea of installing one in their parking lot and they pay you based on the new business it will attract.

Obama should get rid of all energy subsidies and I'm convinced that the electric motor in a car would eventually be adopted in every vehicle - and with that trend would be a race to the top on battery technology with private money!

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Easy there fred, around here talk like that will get you run out of town on a rail.

 

[evnow]

Easy there fred, around here talk like that will get you run out of town on a rail.

Yes - I don't care much for Glenn Beck Economics.

 

[evnow]

So the entire 10 year sequester implemented in ONE year would still require the government to use credit cards!!!

Feds don't use credit cards. Irrespective of how many exclamation marks you use.

First learn the difference between micro & macro economics, then we can talk.