Windmills!

Maybe you can summarize each point for me?

This one for sure.

*
Try peer to peer.

 

No, there are not any "major problems" in either of those technologies.

 

Cmon, your saying cars now are less safe than cars 20 years ago? What we have on the road is a prepondernse of oversized vehicles. 10% of the people who drive these giant SUVs and PU trucks need something so big. I don't know why it has to be a rapid charge for 90% of the vehicles. Cars sit idle in parking lots during the day and in garages at night. When the grid is taxed at the lowest output. Power is going to cost more. If you don't want people to use something you make it more expensive to waste.

Your looking at todays technology to solve a problem 15-25 years down the road. No one is building new fossil fuel plants now, with the exception of small natural gas plants. It is going to be a gradual shift over the next 25 years.
I won't be alive to benefit from it but my kids and grandkids certainly will. And again, personal solar panels will make more than enough energy to power the car during the 8 hours you are at work.

 

That was the one where I said "except a point or two". I explained the rest.

 

Batteries won't hack it and the other solutions for mass storage require major construction. Range and the ability to rapidly "refuel" is another major problem with electric vehicles.

 

No I'm saying cars compared today, the lighter with less structural steel the less safe. I sell to both the steel and auto industry, mainly stamping, and they are bringing lots of newer higher strength steels which are allowing some weight reductions which add to fuel economy. There is also the kinetic aspect of if a 2000lb car crashes into a 4000lb car which one do you want to be in? You say just add more safety features to the 2000 well that adds weight. These are consumer concerns which the manufactures purely from a marketing stand point address so they can sell more cars and do so meeting the demands of the consumer. Government bureaucrats picking numbers out of the air and saying YEA that sounds good isn't the path I want to go down.

You make a lot of assumptions, as in I shut down my house when I got to work and the sun always shines during day, I won't go back over them. You guys still miss the point that wind and solar require some other source that can completely back them up and supply the grid, that otherwise will be sitting there idle not producing a product, not earning any money to pay for themselves. We are no where near the types of storage it would require to be able to run the entire country on wind and solar, not even half the country, not even a tenth of the country.

When we are, when there is remarkable breakthrough discovery..............

Go with proven nuclear and we don't need to waste money on mass storage schemes.

 

You are missing something.
We are not saying replace it all with wind and solar. As a matter of fact we are trying to agree with you that a gas fired plant that is not selling it's energy is losing money.
I showed you the curve that shows what is happening now.

 

I don't have a clue what those curves are supposed to prove. The problem won't so much be diurnal. It will be day to day or even week to week. You put big high pressure area over the US and it cam camp out there weeks at a time. The wind over much of the US under that situation will not provide enough wind power.

 

It will just come from some magical place where investors build HUGE power generation using fossil or nuclear and then have those plants sit there idle just waiting for some solar/wind massive project goes dead because of no wind or sun. There seems to be a lack of understanding that you can't have the back up power sitting idle while they can use the sun and wind and then just kick on when they need. It loses money doing that.

 

The charge power comes from unconverted power plants during the time when they don't sell all their electricity. As more stand alone solar is installed more and more of this cheap energy is available. Why do you think power companies are crying about buying solar?
It might become a problem when more than 50% of the power on the grid comes from wind and solar, but until then it's a money maker for the new power companies.

 

Elon Musk proved you wrong about batteries and the range issue is already being resolved. The fast charging is being addressed too so it looks like you are wrong on all counts.

 

A battery powered car can be refueled in three minutes, like a gasoline powered car?

 

I can drive about five hundred miles at sixty plus mph in my Subaru Outback on a tank of gas.

 

Ahh, range anxiety. There is a new field of medicine opening up for that.

 

So, a battery powered car cannot be refueled in three minutes, like a gasoline powered car? Is that what you're saying?

 

That is what we are saying but people will adapt

The vast majority of electric cars will be city transport

 

So your DAILY COMMUTE is a round trip of 500 miles?

The average round trip commute is 32 miles.

Everyone with an EV leaves home with a FULL TANK every day. Too bad you have to stop for gas so often.

 

Actually, I'm not trying to say anything, but I will.
95% of trips are less than 40 miles.
You can charge to 80% in about 30 minutes.
You can travel coast to coast using Tesla chargers. Their app will schedule your trip.
I don't know about you, but I mostly take trips with my wife. So we stop about every 2 hours anyway.

 

Thank you for confirming that an electric car cannot be fully refueled in three minutes like a gasoline car.

 

Don't get to excited.

 

Excited? Not really.

Thank you for confirming that an electric car cannot be fully refueled in three minutes like a gasoline car.

 

If I couldn't afford an hour out of a 600 mile trip, I think I would fly.

 

Your welcome.

 

So why are electric cars better?

 

Because they are cheaper to operate, cleaner for the environment, quieter inside and out, lower maintenance, allow car pool access better parking at work and in the long term cheaper.
I'm sure I missed some.