Capt. James H. Callahan Posted June 15, 2019 Share Posted June 15, 2019 45 minutes ago, J.D. Daily said: That is why hospitals have on site emergency power systems. And the state requires rigorous testing and maintenance programs that are monitored by the authority having jurisdiction. JAHCO is the national hospital organization that acredits hospitals which has similar requirements as the state. I've worked in 3 hospitals and get all that. Just saying what would happen if these kooks were to get their way. Sorry YL if I highjacked the thread or at least went off on a tangent. Regards, JHC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.D. Daily Posted June 15, 2019 Share Posted June 15, 2019 2 minutes ago, Capt. James H. Callahan said: I've worked in 3 hospitals and get all that. Just saying what would happen if these kooks were to get their way. Regards, JHC The people pushing a zero carbon society are dreamers. Most don't want nuclear power which would have to be a large part of the electric power generation portfolio. There isn't enough land to site all the PV & wind generation nor enough mining & refining capacity in the world to meet the needed materials to manufacture the panels or wind turbines. I just read an article about what it would take to replace all the IC engine powered vehicles in the UK. For some of the metals it would consume a couple of years of the world's production. They assume their will be some quantum leap in battery technology in the near future which is not likely. Since the Arab oil embargo scientists & engineers have been looking for the Holly Grail of battery chemistry, high energy density using abundant materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. James H. Callahan Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 If somebody can ever come up with the "magic bottle" to contain an atomic fusion reaction, that would go a long way. Has not happened to date. JHC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 On 6/14/2019 at 12:47 PM, Jabez Cowboy,SASS # 50129 said: Have you all seen a Tesla Burn ??? They are next to impossible to put out ... It took two fire crews over a hour to put one out .... What does it cost to have Two crews and a Fire Chief out to put your fire out ??? Jabez Cowboy Believe it or not, there are municipalities that have a trailer filled with water. They lift the car and dunk it in the tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 Curious... how much pollution does a non-polluting Tesla put into the atmosphere when it burns...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 15 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said: Curious... how much pollution does a non-polluting Tesla put into the atmosphere when it burns...? Red herring. How much pollution does any car put into the atmosphere when it catches fire? There've been plenty of gas cars that have caught fire. Data is still too new, but right now there are about 4-5 tesla's burning up for every billion miles traveled. That's compared to 55 ICE cars for every billion miles traveled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, Rooster Cognizant said: Red herring. How much pollution does any car put into the atmosphere when it catches fire? There've been plenty of gas cars that have caught fire. Data is still too new, but right now there are about 4-5 tesla's burning up for every billion miles traveled. That's compared to 55 ICE cars for every billion miles traveled. Not a "red herring" at all. My question - only somewhat tongue-in-cheek - was intended to be more qualitative that quantitative. We pretty much know what the pollutants are when an internal combustion vehicle burns. But what's released into the atmosphere when a large bank of batteries burns? I do not know, but suspect it's something a bit nastier than hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 5 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said: Not a "red herring" at all. My question - only somewhat tongue-in-cheek - was intended to be more qualitative that quantitative. We pretty much know what the pollutants are when an internal combustion vehicle burns. But what's released into the atmosphere when a large bank of batteries burns? I do not know, but suspect it's something a bit nastier than hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen.... You make a really good point, the public may not know all the pollutants from a burning lithium-ion battery. I would certainly not want to make light of a lithium-ion battery fire. They can burn very hot, and can give off various gasses such as CO (carbon monoxide) CO2 (carbon dioxide), polyvinylidene flouride (PVdF), phosphoryl fluoride (POF3) and others. The fluorines are from lithium hexafluorophosphate or other fluorine salts used in battery manufacture. On the bright side, a vehicle like the Tesla Model S has a battery pack with 16 modules, with internal firewalls and venting for the packs. It would be unusual for a fire to start in all 16 simultaneously. I suppose they could, but whatever could do that (inferno, volcano, etc) is likely a bigger immediate problem than the car. The good news, unlike a traditional car-b-que, there is likely to be more time to put it out before all the cells catch fire, thus limiting many of the pollutants. These modules with firewalls are why fire departments need better training on EV fires. Past fires have shown that when people thought an EV fire was out, it really was not, and started up again a little later (which is why some departments are just dunking the whole car in a big tank now) On the plus side, data from the fires will be used to make the EV cars safer from fires. If only we could do something about the 150 ICE cars per day that catch fire... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 5 On 6/13/2019 at 7:07 AM, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: ...snip... The thing that bothers me about electric cars is not so much the cars themselves. It’s the ability to charge, the competition for chargers away from home and most of all, the attitude of entitlement that I am seeing in electric car owners in regards to public charging stations. We have 3 parking spots at work. One in the main lot. One in a remote parking spot and one in a handicapped spot right in front of the building. They are all 3 “class 2” chargers, I believe. We have a guy that has a Tesla S. He has been with us since the shop opened and he parks his car at a charger, plugs it in and leaves it all day. He believes he has “seniority” regarding the charger. Each spot has a sign that says 4 hours parking / charging maximum. The other day I roll in on my 50mpg motorcycle and there is a Chevy Volt (hybrid) parked in the handicapped spot and it’s plugged in. There is no handicapped placard in the car. I walked over and asked the guard who owned the car. It was another security guard. He said the guy in the black Tesla S keeps hogging the charger. I told him about the other charger further away. I also told him that I have no jurisdiction over parking but if s police officer comes onto the property and gives him a ticket he can expect to pay around $500. We have two plug in cars taking 2 of 3 spots and I heard someone else is going to be “needing” a spot. I talked to my boss and the boss of the Tesla S driver and told them we are looking at a potential issue. I also told them that this entitlement mentality needs to be squashed now. I asked them both how they would feel if all the evil gas powered car drivers came to work expecting the company to provide a fuel truck to come and top off everyone’s fuel tanks? The other thing that I wonder is that now these people are provided “free” electricity for charging. Free = someone is paying. What is going to happen when it’s not “free”? Or, when it’s discovered that somehow the taxpayers are paying for this power and that “entitlement” is ended. Who is going to be the first dirtbag to step up and sue to get that “entitlement” back? There is a large parking lot at a mall near me that has about 30-40 Tesla charging stations and they are always occupied. Tesla provides this for Tesla drivers. The mall is privately owned. I am told Tesla pays the electric bill but am told it’s “free” to Tesla drivers. How much do you want to bet once Tesla get it’s hooks in enough people that “free” service goes away and those people will expect someone else to pay for their power. I can see this entire electric car thing becoming a serious PITA soon and somehow I believe non-electric car drivers are going to be expected to pony up for it. I truly have to wonder about the sensibilities of people that spend $40-$90K on a car and then leave it in a remote mall parking lot for 8-12 hours a day. I wouldn’t leave my 2002 Chevy truck in a mall parking lot for even a couple of hours. I'm sorry you had an employee that couldn't be bothered to walk a little extra, but don't broad brush all EV drivers by that one person's actions. It's interesting you are running into this. In the EV community, there is a term, "ICEd", that's when an EV spot is being taken up by a non-EV car, keeping the EV cars from charging. This, I would bet, is more prevalent than EV's people taking up handicapped spots. Icing, blocking EV spots, seems to be the new "rolling coal", which, by the way, was a completely sophomoric action. https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060110681 Tesla has been saying for a long time the supercharger system won't always be free and has already been phasing in a system where people pay. Currently, there is a limit of I believe 400KWh of free charging before you have to pay. Having it free for a while was an incentive to help sell cars. No different than if a dealer gave you a gas card, or a sales rebate, when you buy a regular ICE car. There are networks of non-Tesla chargers around the country. ChargePoint is a well known one. People, or companies, pay to install a ChargePoint charger at their location, and those same people pay the electric bill for it. I could put one in my home, and allow others to use it. These units may or may not be free for people to use to charge. The company that owns them makes that determination. Some allow charging for free, some allow charging for a period of time (1 or 2 hours) for free before one has to pay, some you have to pay to charge from the start. It's totally based on what the owner of it wants to do, the ChargePoint network manages the payment system. Some companies choose to offer free charging, for whatever business reasons they decided. Maybe to draw people to their location, maybe to portray an image, maybe to jump in before it's too late. That's capitalism, and one would think conservatives would be OK with businesses making their own decisions. Those chargers are in lots of locations; offices, dealerships that sell plug-in cars, malls, parking garages, hotels, etc. If a company makes a business decision to offer charging, hoping to attract business, I'm not sure why it suddenly becomes some kind of entitlement, or why the "evil gas powered car drivers" would become jealous of it. Is it just because they have a better parking spot? Lastly, I'm sure that as more people purchase plug-in cars, the free electric charging station will go away, and they'll start charging for charging. Right now it's an incentive, but it won't stick around once there are millions of plug-in cars out there. If you can take advantage of the free ones today, why wouldn't you? Why would you wait until they are not free any longer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Rooster Cognizant said: I'm sorry you had an employee that couldn't be bothered to walk a little extra, but don't broad brush all EV drivers by that one person's actions. It's interesting you are running into this. In the EV community, there is a term, "ICEd", that's when an EV spot is being taken up by a non-EV car, keeping the EV cars from charging. This, I would bet, is more prevalent than EV's people taking up handicapped spots. Icing, blocking EV spots, seems to be the new "rolling coal", which, by the way, was a completely sophomoric action. https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060110681 Tesla has been saying for a long time the supercharger system won't always be free and has already been phasing in a system where people pay. Currently, there is a limit of I believe 400KWh of free charging before you have to pay. Having it free for a while was an incentive to help sell cars. No different than if a dealer gave you a gas card, or a sales rebate, when you buy a regular ICE car. There are networks of non-Tesla chargers around the country. ChargePoint is a well known one. People, or companies, pay to install a ChargePoint charger at their location, and those same people pay the electric bill for it. I could put one in my home, and allow others to use it. These units may or may not be free for people to use to charge. The company that owns them makes that determination. Some allow charging for free, some allow charging for a period of time (1 or 2 hours) for free before one has to pay, some you have to pay to charge from the start. It's totally based on what the owner of it wants to do, the ChargePoint network manages the payment system. Some companies choose to offer free charging, for whatever business reasons they decided. Maybe to draw people to their location, maybe to portray an image, maybe to jump in before it's too late. That's capitalism, and one would think conservatives would be OK with businesses making their own decisions. Those chargers are in lots of locations; offices, dealerships that sell plug-in cars, malls, parking garages, hotels, etc. If a company makes a business decision to offer charging, hoping to attract business, I'm not sure why it suddenly becomes some kind of entitlement, or why the "evil gas powered car drivers" would become jealous of it. Is it just because they have a better parking spot? Lastly, I'm sure that as more people purchase plug-in cars, the free electric charging station will go away, and they'll start charging for charging. Right now it's an incentive, but it won't stick around once there are millions of plug-in cars out there. If you can take advantage of the free ones today, why wouldn't you? Why would you wait until they are not free any longer? Why are you sorry? I prefer gasoline...and paying my own way. I do not park in EV spots or any other spot where I am not authorized or permitted. Something that makes me laugh is people who drive a car that gets say 200 miles per tank don’t need a gas truck to show up and top off their tanks every time they drive 20 or 30 miles. Why do EV drivers feel they need to top off every time they drive some where? (No answer needed. It’s a hypothetical question). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 1 9 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: Why are you sorry? I prefer gasoline...and paying my own way. I do not park in EV spots or any other spot where I am not authorized or permitted. Something that makes me laugh is people who drive a car that gets say 200 miles per tank don’t need a gas truck to show up and top off their tanks every time they drive 20 or 30 miles. Why do EV drivers feel they need to top off every time they drive some where? (No answer needed. It’s a hypothetical question). Since it's a hypothetical question, here's another hypothetical question. Why not; if it's a closer spot and it's free? Why would someone begrudge people that take advantage of the perks a business offers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Rooster Cognizant said: Since it's a hypothetical question, here's another hypothetical question. Why not; if it's a closer spot and it's free? Why would someone begrudge people that take advantage of the perks a business offers? Why would I park in a "compact" spot when there is a closer-to-the-door, full-size spot? My answer, because it is the polite thing to do and my car fits nicely in one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 "Polite," Allie? Sadly, there's a word that seems to have fallen out of common use - particularly among younger generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 Odd that I cannot copy and quote your post Rooster Cognizant... Anyway, perhaps you aren't aware that here in California and in Oregon businesses do not install charging stations out of the goodness of their hearts. They are mandated by the government to do so. Most businesses move them close so they can more easily hook them up to their existing power. Most businesses don't charge for the power because the logistics of doing so isn't worth the hassle right now. If I had my way the chargers where I work wouldn't exist. The taxpayers paid for them and pay for the power used by them. It's not a business that was mandated to install them and wishes to pay for the electricity. I am looking forward to when all the electricity at these stations is paid for by the users so that maybe they can help pay their fair share of the infrastructure costs (Taxes) to maintain the roadways that they do not pay now through gasoline taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 said: Why would I park in a "compact" spot when there is a closer-to-the-door, full-size spot? My answer, because it is the polite thing to do and my car fits nicely in one. I don't understand. Are you implying it's impolite for a person that drives an electric vehicle, that could use some charge, to park in an EV spot and use the charger? I'd consider it impolite to hog the space for hours if your car has completed charging, but otherwise, that's what they are there for. I'd consider it really impolite for a non EV car to block an EV from charging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 2 55 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: Odd that I cannot copy and quote your post Rooster Cognizant... Anyway, perhaps you aren't aware that here in California and in Oregon businesses do not install charging stations out of the goodness of their hearts. They are mandated by the government to do so. Most businesses move them close so they can more easily hook them up to their existing power. Most businesses don't charge for the power because the logistics of doing so isn't worth the hassle right now. If I had my way the chargers where I work wouldn't exist. The taxpayers paid for them and pay for the power used by them. It's not a business that was mandated to install them and wishes to pay for the electricity. I am looking forward to when all the electricity at these stations is paid for by the users so that maybe they can help pay their fair share of the infrastructure costs (Taxes) to maintain the roadways that they do not pay now through gasoline taxes. If you have a story showing how California govt forced a private business to pay for and install a charger, I'd be really interested in seeing it. Not saying it didn't happen, just that I could not find it via google. What I did find: CA passed a budget, working with power generation companies, to work on installing an EV charging infrastructure. They passed laws such that a home owners association could not block someone from installing a charger at their home, and other laws allowing private citizens to have a charger. The data I found was less clear on renters and whether a charger could be forced there, and who pays for it. What I'm having a hard time googling is specifically some business, like a shopping center or hotel, that was mandated and forced to install a charger. Also, I disagree with your premise, "Most businesses don't charge for the power because the logistics of doing so isn't worth the hassle right now." - it's incredibly easy. I can install a ChargePoint station at my house, connect the unit to my Wifi, and use my computer or phone to set how much to charge for charging, and modify it anytime I want online. People simply tap their phone (or certain credit cards) to the charger, and the payment happens directly. It's easier than pumping gas. Don't worry about taxes, if there is one thing our govt is good at is taxing people, I have full faith they will find a way to tax EV drivers for their share of road taxes. I'm not sure how taxpayers are paying for the chargers where you work, can you explain that more in depth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 I was mistaken. The businesses mandated to install EV chargers are dual use commercial and residential properties. Which is a big trend here now.. Info and light reading. https://arb.ca.gov/cc/greenbuildings/pdf/tcac2018.pdf https://www.green-technology.org/gcsummit18/images/Accessibility-Regs-EVCS.pdf https://chargedevs.com/newswire/california-building-code-to-require-all-new-construction-to-be-ev-ready/ https://www.weho.org/home/showdocument?id=36247 https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/1/17416778/california-new-york-electric-charging-investment-stations The chargers where I work were paid for by the taxpayers and are funded by the tax payers. I work at a public agency. Being a subject that is not near and dear to my heart my part in this conversation is now over. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Cognizant Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 2 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: I was mistaken. The businesses mandated to install EV chargers are dual use commercial and residential properties. Which is a big trend here now.. Info and light reading. https://arb.ca.gov/cc/greenbuildings/pdf/tcac2018.pdf https://www.green-technology.org/gcsummit18/images/Accessibility-Regs-EVCS.pdf https://chargedevs.com/newswire/california-building-code-to-require-all-new-construction-to-be-ev-ready/ https://www.weho.org/home/showdocument?id=36247 https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/1/17416778/california-new-york-electric-charging-investment-stations The chargers where I work were paid for by the taxpayers and are funded by the tax payers. I work at a public agency. Being a subject that is not near and dear to my heart my part in this conversation is now over. Thanks. Thanks for the update! It appears the code is mandating the new construction in question be ready to install EV equipment, not being forced to actually install and pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.