Mismanaged - The Problem With Government-Funded EV Chargers (TMC Podcast Clip)

Here's a clip from TMC Podcast #13, where we discuss Biden's new policy to build $7.5 billion dollars' worth of EV chargers.

“The number is $7.5 billion dollars, and you’d think the industry would pay for most of it since they want us to buy their cars. But instead, you and I, the consumer, will take the hit.

Just take some of that profit you just made on all the oil, and roll it over into EVs.”

The full podcast video, if you're interested, is linked down below.

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/thr...mprove-tesla’s-service-tmc-podcast-13.269425/

 

[Earl]

I actually think that this is one of the main reasons why Tesla is considering opening up charging stations to other cars in the US (so they can get givernment incentive funding that requires CCS connections)...Say what you want about Tesla, but they're smart like a fox when it comes to this stuff. Remember the Harris Ranch battery swapping station? Tesla got extra California clean air credits per car sold because the batteries were swappable. As soon as the rules were changed to reduce or eliminate the extra credits, that battery swapping station was cricketville...

Don't forget that Tesla, and only Tesla, gained significant market data from the battery swapping so they can better decide whether and/or when that path makes sense in the future, as well. This will enable them to avoid potentially wasting huge investment on deploying this capability only to find it doesn't make sense.

 

[EdgeM3LR]

I believe it is, site by site. My company provides components and the growth is significant. Held back by permits, panel availability, and grid

Yep, it is a supply and integration problem, not a math problem. Installing utility batteries to help with this now, again supply issues, integration etc. are slowing things down. It is happening though, we have to keep deploying and solving the following problem.

 

[Mockingbird]

I actually think that this is one of the main reasons why Tesla is considering opening up charging stations to other cars in the US (so they can get givernment incentive funding that requires CCS connections)...Say what you want about Tesla, but they're smart like a fox when it comes to this stuff. Remember the Harris Ranch battery swapping station? Tesla got extra California clean air credits per car sold because the batteries were swappable. As soon as the rules were changed to reduce or eliminate the extra credits, that battery swapping station was cricketville...

That's not "smart like a fox".

Tesla would have to be stupid to not do it.

 

[Pattonator]

I'm surprised this isn't already being done then. Somewhere in Nevada or Arizona or something

One can actually calculate it fairly easily (good task for your 6 kids). It does, of course, depend on assumptions such as over-production needed, efficiencies, solar insolation, etc.
I assume the basic inputs are about 1 KW/sq meter of solar radiation and that the USA consumes about 3.9 trillion KWH/year. Throwing in a few knock downs and plus-ups and I come up with about 100 km X 100 km needed with no over-production. 150 mi X 150 mi seems highly feasible.

You cannot assume 100% efficiency as solar panels tend to be about 20-21% efficient. Then you have weather and temperature effects on efficiency and the angle of the sun isn't able to be fully captured for a full day. So a place like Tuscon has an average of 6.61 kwh/m2 of solar radiation so you might actually capture more than 1kwh/m2. That being said your numbers are off on the average US consumption.

The US consumes: 3930 terawatts hours or 3.93 quadrillion watt hours. U.S. electricity consumption 2021 | Statista so your numbers are off by a factor of 1,000.

There is no feasible way to completely use solar to generate all of our electricity needs.

On my roof in Florida I cannot even fully generate enough electricity on my roof to fully cover my consumption of electricity and that is with some of the most efficient panels on the market.

 

[Big 'D']

It seems to me that the present government administration, due to lobbying by the auto unions, will push against Tesla receiving any substantial funds when it comes to furthering EV charger networks.

 

[Mockingbird]

It seems to me that the present government administration, due to lobbying by the auto unions, will push against Tesla receiving any substantial funds when it comes to furthering EV charger networks.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Nowhere are auto unions mentioned in the DOT guideline.

 

[father_of_6]

You don't know what you are talking about.

Nowhere are auto unions mentioned in the DOT guideline.

No need to be mean. The administration intentionally excluded Tesla from an EV-centered Whitehouse event, and the proposed new tax credits were written in ways that would specifically only exclude Tesla from being applicable.

Additionally, our president announced that GM has "electrified the entire auto industry" and other statements that imply GM is "leading the way" to EV, all while completely ignoring Tesla.

So... how can you so rudely exclaim that "You don't know what you're talking about"? Is it so far-fetched to expect that the legislation regarding funding for charging networks will also exclude Tesla?

I think you owe @Big 'D' an apology. Or I want your half of our "best friends forever" keychain back.

 

[Mockingbird]

No need to be mean. The administration intentionally excluded Tesla from an EV-centered Whitehouse event, and the proposed new tax credits were written in ways that would specifically only exclude Tesla from being applicable.

Additionally, our president announced that GM has "electrified the entire auto industry" and other statements that imply GM is "leading the way" to EV, all while completely ignoring Tesla.

So... how can you so rudely exclaim that "You don't know what you're talking about"? Is it so far-fetched to expect that the legislation regarding funding for charging networks will also exclude Tesla?

I think you owe @Big 'D' an apology. Or I want your half of our "best friends forever" keychain back.

Show me where the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program mentions unions.

 

[father_of_6]

Show me where the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program mentions unions.

This misses the point. A new member made their *first post* and had something quite reasonable to say. You attacked them because you had more information.

It would've been nice if you'd simply provided that additional information in a friendly manner so that others could learn from it (myself included).

If we have to fear an attack every time we make a comment, it discourages anyone from contributing. I appreciate that you've taught me something new today. I hope we can still be friends.

 

[Big 'D']

You don't know what you are talking about.

Nowhere are auto unions mentioned in the DOT guideline.

I would be shocked if they were. Don’t you know how politics work?

 

[Mockingbird]

This misses the point. A new member made their *first post* and had something quite reasonable to say.

I did not notice that it was a new user, probably because I was commenting from my phone.

Here is the guideline:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/alternative_fuel_corridors/nominations/90d_nevi_formula_program_guidance.pdf

 

[Big 'D']

No need to be mean. The administration intentionally excluded Tesla from an EV-centered Whitehouse event, and the proposed new tax credits were written in ways that would specifically only exclude Tesla from being applicable.

Additionally, our president announced that GM has "electrified the entire auto industry" and other statements that imply GM is "leading the way" to EV, all while completely ignoring Tesla.

So... how can you so rudely exclaim that "You don't know what you're talking about"? Is it so far-fetched to expect that the legislation regarding funding for charging networks will also exclude Tesla?

I think you owe @Big 'D' an apology. Or I want your half of our "best friends forever" keychain back.

No worries! I I respect everyone to give an opinion just as I did. Your comments on what this administration has stated publicly are spot on. We will see how it all plays out. I will hope our elected official use wisdom in making decisions and leave politics out of the decision making process.

 

[Mockingbird]

I would be shocked if they were. Don’t you know how politics work?

No worries! I I respect everyone to give an opinion just as I did. Your comments on what this administration has stated publicly are spot on. We will see how it all plays out. I will hope our elected official use wisdom in making decisions and leave politics out of the decision making process.

So you admit that you are spreading a conspiracy not supported by facts.

The states are the ones who are going to be giving contracts and distributing the money, NOT Joe Biden.

 

[Big 'D']

Mockingbird you have a serious problem.

 

[Mockingbird]

Mockingbird you have a serious problem.

You mean that I actually do my research before commenting, unlike you.

 

[Big 'D']

You mean that I actually do my research before commenting, unlike you.

Mockingbird you are a sad individual. If you represent what this forum is about, I want no part of it. I have better things to do than battle with you.

 

[Mockingbird]

Mockingbird you are a sad individual. If you represent what this forum is about, I want no part of it. I have better things to do than battle with you.

You mean there is some expectations for users to actually look up facts.

 

[Tensorflow]

Why would the oil companies roll profits into EV chargers? "Hey, lets help build out this infrastructure that will eventually doom our business." Of course, you can ask, but why would they volunteer to do this?

Ultimately, you would think the source of the energy itself should run with this. Start with the power companies since they actually distribute the source needed to charge these vehicles. Get them to hop on board to help standardize the industry. They are the ones who will benefit directly from the switch to EV. But we also need to look at building more power plants, including nuclear. Today's solar and wind technology will not be able to keep up with the energy demands of tomorrow, especially if we see 50-75% EVs on the road. We must be realistic.

Glad to see another proponent of nuclear energy on here. If we want to replace oil and gas as energy sources, nuclear is the way to go. Solar, wind, and thermal are all expensive due to low efficiency, while hydro causes massive ecological problems.

 

[Rocky_H]

while hydro causes massive ecological problems.

Well that's a new one. Hydro is one of the most reliable and clean and adjustable methods for energy generation there is. The main downside to it is that it's just not available in a lot of places. The terrain has to already exist for running water. It's hard to generate from a pond in flat Kansas.