California energy shortage

[oxmixmudd]

There was some fearmonger on another discussion board who tried to convince everyone that a heatwave in the Yukon was starting forest fires. The heatwave in question barely broke 80°F. And, of course, the heatwave (nothing terribly abnormal, BTW) was attributed to Climate Change.

The arctic has warmed the most of any area, and the weather in Anchorage (for example) is nothing like it was when I lived there as a kid in the early '60s. It is significantly warmer now than it was then. And whereas S. CA has seen 3 degrees in the last century, Anchorage has seen over 3 degrees just since 1969! And the farther north you go, the worse it gets, with Northern Alaska a whopping 6 (5.8) degrees warmer on average than in 1969.

https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/how-climate-crisis-affecting-alaska


blog-alaska-2.png

I would recommend - in general - against forming one's opinions on scientific subjects from those that might believe the science but be too ignorant to communicate the results correctly.

[oxmixmudd]

Incentives? sure. Outlawing fossil fuels, no. Look at what the government has done to our coal industry. Put entire towns out of business. Look at the pipeline Biden shut down as soon as he took office. Put thousands out of work and just forced the oil to be transported with trucks which added pollution.

We have to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, and even without that, Natural Gas is much cleaner than coal. Coal is abundant, but about the worst source of energy we have for the environment. The solution is to bring new industries into coal producing states and retrain coal miners to do other things. Would it not be better to take the money spent on caring for sick coal miners dying of black lung, and cleaning up polluted environments damaged by coal mining, and cleaning the air dirtied by coal fired power plants, and dealing with rising seas and higher heat from the resulting higher CO2, and just retrain the coal miners and bring new industries into their states?

The conservative mindset on AGW is massively paranoid and destructive, not too mention based on a good bit of oil industry funded pseudo-science. If you want to preserve a voice for conservative ideas on other issues, it would be best not to be for preserving the coal industry at the expense of the environment and public health.

[CivilDiscourse]

People who do a lot of driving really need to get a level 2 charger. I could have done without one, but it's much more convenient when your car charges more quickly.

That said, I still have a gas powered SUV, and would not want to rely solely on an electric car until

1) They can add 300 miles or so of range in the time it takes to fill a gas powered car's tank
2) Recharging stations are as common as gas stations everywhere

But we'll probably get to that point within the next 5 or 10 years.

The range is fairly close, recharging will likely come. The biggest hurdle, I believe is probably the speed of charging. You can "recharge" a gas vehicle in just a couple of minutes. On the other hand, recharging an EV takes significantly longer. This narrows the long-range capability.

[seanD]

There were people who were very unhappy about us getting rid of the lead in gasoline, but we managed it without much political and social destabilization.

I expect the same can be accomplished for the rest of the gasoline. It will just take a little longer.



The only real negative trade-off is financial. At least for now, renewables are more expensive than fossil fuels, and California has pretty high electricity rates.

I admittedly don't a thing about the lead issue, though I doubt it was much of a problem as you claim. You may say it was, but there would be zero reason for me to believe you.

And yes, the negative trade-off is financial (if by financial you mean economic), hence it's negative effects on the economy, hence it's negative effects on the populace. You speak like that doesn't have monumental significance and consequence.

[Sparko]

One of those increasingly common instances where real life becomes impossible to parody.

With that check out the new thread I am starting in a minute about a NZ climate group

I was about to say that environmentalists won't be happy until we go back to early-1800s standard of living, but then it occurred to me that they would start complaining about everybody chopping down trees for building materials and fuel, and the pollution produced by wood and coal fires.

Yeah the world produced a lot more pollution in the 1800s than now.

[Sparko]

We have to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, and even without that, Natural Gas is much cleaner than coal. Coal is abundant, but about the worst source of energy we have for the environment. The solution is to bring new industries into coal producing states and retrain coal miners to do other things. Would it not be better to take the money spent on caring for sick coal miners dying of black lung, and cleaning up polluted environments damaged by coal mining, and cleaning the air dirtied by coal fired power plants, and dealing with rising seas and higher heat from the resulting higher CO2, and just retrain the coal miners and bring new industries into their states?

The conservative mindset on AGW is massively paranoid and destructive, not too mention based on a good bit of oil industry funded pseudo-science. If you want to preserve a voice for conservative ideas on other issues, it would be best not to be for preserving the coal industry at the expense of the environment and public health.

You kind of made my point. The government just shut down coal mines with no retraining or alternate jobs for coal miners. Just like it did with the Keystone pipeline. If it happened naturally, with coal becoming less used as other sources took over, then there would be time for the miners to retire or find other work, maybe even new industries could pop up in coal country. Or perhaps they could have found ways to clean up the emissions. But no, the government is a hammer. Smash. Destroying thousands of lives to "save the planet"

I am of the mindset that the best way to change the world is through better technology. Build it and they will come. Make a better car that people want and they will buy it over a gas guzzler. I am against the government trying to force change through regulations. They have no idea what they are doing and are all driven by one thing: getting re-elected. They don't understand energy, or technology, or anything really. Just getting votes.

[oxmixmudd]

The range is fairly close, recharging will likely come. The biggest hurdle, I believe is probably the speed of charging. You can "recharge" a gas vehicle in just a couple of minutes. On the other hand, recharging an EV takes significantly longer. This narrows the long-range capability.

ETA: Adding to the problem of the low number of charging stations:

Not sure which is the more difficult problem, getting the batteries to take charge quickly or setting up supercharging stations able to deliver enough power to do the job. There are new technologies that make charging much faster (though they are heavier),

https://www.azonano.com/article.aspx...ten%20seconds.

and then there is always the possibility we'll find a workable supercapacitor with enough capacity.

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-ne...ev-and-hybrid/

supercapacitors don't necessarily hold charge a long time, but one idea is to charge the supercapacitor quickly then let it's charge drain into the batteries as you drive over a longer time. So you could stop for 10 minutes, add 75 miles of range to the battery directly, but drop another 75 into a supercapacitor that continues charging the batteries as you pull away.


But how do you deliver 100kw in 6 minutes? That is a device that can deliver 1,000,000 KwH. How many of those can you hang off the grid till you bring the grid to it's knees if they are all in use at one time? I think the charging stations themselves will likely need a fairly significant mass storage capability or their own that can store energy when no-one is 'filling up', then deliver it independent of the grid when several cars are charging at the same time or one after the other.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ene...eports/583970/

[CivilDiscourse]

Did some math to deal with general cost of driving a Tesla Model 3 (standard range) vs an Acrua TLX (a common car at around the same price point)

State	State Avg Price in cents per KWH	50KWH Tesla Price to fully charge in $	Price per mile (263 mile Range)	Price Per Gallon	Acura TLX 31Mpg highway	Acura TLX 22MPG City	MPG Needed to match Tesla Price/mile
Alabama	12.41	$6.21	$0.02	2.795	$0.09	$0.13	118.47
Alaska	22.54	$11.27	$0.04	3.392	$0.11	$0.15	79.16
Arizona	13.16	$6.58	$0.03	3.108	$0.10	$0.14	124.23
Arkansas	9.99	$5.00	$0.02	2.767	$0.09	$0.13	145.69
California	19.9	$9.95	$0.04	4.238	$0.14	$0.19	112.02
Colorado	12.28	$6.14	$0.02	3.318	$0.11	$0.15	142.12
Connecticut	21.62	$10.81	$0.04	3.093	$0.10	$0.14	75.25
DC	13.21	$6.61	$0.03	3.207	$0.10	$0.15	127.70
Delaware	12.05	$6.03	$0.02	2.946	$0.10	$0.13	128.60
Florida	11.37	$5.69	$0.02	2.94	$0.09	$0.13	136.01
Georgia	12.26	$6.13	$0.02	2.895	$0.09	$0.13	124.21
Hawaii	32.76	$16.38	$0.06	3.981	$0.13	$0.18	63.92
Idaho	10.58	$5.29	$0.02	3.312	$0.11	$0.15	164.66
Illinois	12.56	$6.28	$0.02	3.315	$0.11	$0.15	138.83
Indiana	12.02	$6.01	$0.02	3.001	$0.10	$0.14	131.32
Iowa	13.81	$6.91	$0.03	2.871	$0.09	$0.13	109.35
Kansas	11.56	$5.78	$0.02	2.833	$0.09	$0.13	128.91
Kentucky	10.56	$5.28	$0.02	2.873	$0.09	$0.13	143.11
Louisiana	9.37	$4.69	$0.02	2.716	$0.09	$0.12	152.47
Maine	16.16	$8.08	$0.03	3.061	$0.10	$0.14	99.63
Maryland	13.92	$6.96	$0.03	2.968	$0.10	$0.13	112.15
Massachusetts	21.11	$10.56	$0.04	2.962	$0.10	$0.13	73.80
Michigan	16.07	$8.04	$0.03	3.117	$0.10	$0.14	102.03
Minnesota	14.09	$7.05	$0.03	2.863	$0.09	$0.13	106.88
Mississippi	11.55	$5.78	$0.02	2.718	$0.09	$0.12	123.78
Missouri	13.23	$6.62	$0.03	2.75	$0.09	$0.13	109.33
Montana	11.85	$5.93	$0.02	3.01	$0.10	$0.14	133.61
Nebraska	11.31	$5.66	$0.02	2.906	$0.09	$0.13	135.15
Nevada	11.67	$5.84	$0.02	3.671	$0.12	$0.17	165.46
New Hampshire	19.63	$9.82	$0.04	2.95	$0.10	$0.13	79.05
New Jersey	15.64	$7.82	$0.03	3.078	$0.10	$0.14	103.52
New Mexico	13.37	$6.69	$0.03	2.976	$0.10	$0.14	117.08
New York	19.3	$9.65	$0.04	3.136	$0.10	$0.14	85.47
North Carolina	11.24	$5.62	$0.02	2.878	$0.09	$0.13	134.68
North Dakota	12.07	$6.04	$0.02	2.9	$0.09	$0.13	126.38
Ohio	12.64	$6.32	$0.02	2.998	$0.10	$0.14	124.76
Oklahoma	10.72	$5.36	$0.02	2.755	$0.09	$0.13	135.18
Oregon	11.02	$5.51	$0.02	3.489	$0.11	$0.16	166.53
Pennsylvania	14.38	$7.19	$0.03	3.178	$0.10	$0.14	116.25
Rhode Island	18.64	$9.32	$0.04	2.975	$0.10	$0.14	83.95
South Carolina	12.91	$6.46	$0.02	2.764	$0.09	$0.13	112.62
South Dakota	12.39	$6.20	$0.02	2.945	$0.10	$0.13	125.03
Tennessee	10.79	$5.40	$0.02	2.849	$0.09	$0.13	138.89
Texas	11.36	$5.68	$0.02	2.738	$0.09	$0.12	126.78
Utah	10.63	$5.32	$0.02	3.424	$0.11	$0.16	169.43
Vermont	18.5	$9.25	$0.04	2.978	$0.10	$0.14	84.67
Virginia	12.4	$6.20	$0.02	2.929	$0.09	$0.13	124.25
Washington	9.79	$4.90	$0.02	3.64	$0.12	$0.17	195.57
West Virginia	11.57	$5.79	$0.02	2.992	$0.10	$0.14	136.02
Wisconsin	14.28	$7.14	$0.03	2.904	$0.09	$0.13	106.97
Wyoming	12.3	$6.15	$0.02	3.178	$0.10	$0.14	135.90

[oxmixmudd]

You kind of made my point. The government just shut down coal mines with no retraining or alternate jobs for coal miners. Just like it did with the Keystone pipeline. If it happened naturally, with coal becoming less used as other sources took over, then there would be time for the miners to retire or find other work, maybe even new industries could pop up in coal country. Or perhaps they could have found ways to clean up the emissions. But no, the government is a hammer. Smash. Destroying thousands of lives to "save the planet"

I am of the mindset that the best way to change the world is through better technology. Build it and they will come. Make a better car that people want and they will buy it over a gas guzzler. I am against the government trying to force change through regulations. They have no idea what they are doing and are all driven by one thing: getting re-elected. They don't understand energy, or technology, or anything really. Just getting votes.

Well yes, that is the American way. And trying not to be be too sarcastic, does it occur to you that arguments for unbridled capitalism and against any form of socialism are what drive these sorts of catastrophic approach to the problem? Moving away from fossil fuels is not an option, but the free market will not move away from fossil fuels till it is forced to do so. And that will be one or both of a climate catastrophe and peak oil. Waiting till we hit one or both of those is just stupid to a degree it's hard to imagine people would be willing to allow themselves to be.

So perhaps we should be a little less critical of an approach that mandates change but also compensates those affected with incentives for retraining or the establishment of new industries in areas where the old industries are shutting down. I'm sure there are smart and dumb ways to do all that, but being against doing it at all is even dumber - in my opinion.

[oxmixmudd]

Did some math to deal with general cost of driving a Tesla Model 3 (standard range) vs an Acrua TLX (a common car at around the same price point)

State	State Avg Price in cents per KWH	50KWH Tesla Price to fully charge in $	Price per mile (263 mile Range)	Price Per Gallon	Acura TLX 31Mpg highway	Acura TLX 22MPG City	MPG Needed to match Tesla Price/mile
Alabama	12.41	$6.21	$0.02	2.795	$0.09	$0.13	118.47
Alaska	22.54	$11.27	$0.04	3.392	$0.11	$0.15	79.16
Arizona	13.16	$6.58	$0.03	3.108	$0.10	$0.14	124.23
Arkansas	9.99	$5.00	$0.02	2.767	$0.09	$0.13	145.69
California	19.9	$9.95	$0.04	4.238	$0.14	$0.19	112.02
Colorado	12.28	$6.14	$0.02	3.318	$0.11	$0.15	142.12
Connecticut	21.62	$10.81	$0.04	3.093	$0.10	$0.14	75.25
DC	13.21	$6.61	$0.03	3.207	$0.10	$0.15	127.70
Delaware	12.05	$6.03	$0.02	2.946	$0.10	$0.13	128.60
Florida	11.37	$5.69	$0.02	2.94	$0.09	$0.13	136.01
Georgia	12.26	$6.13	$0.02	2.895	$0.09	$0.13	124.21
Hawaii	32.76	$16.38	$0.06	3.981	$0.13	$0.18	63.92
Idaho	10.58	$5.29	$0.02	3.312	$0.11	$0.15	164.66
Illinois	12.56	$6.28	$0.02	3.315	$0.11	$0.15	138.83
Indiana	12.02	$6.01	$0.02	3.001	$0.10	$0.14	131.32
Iowa	13.81	$6.91	$0.03	2.871	$0.09	$0.13	109.35
Kansas	11.56	$5.78	$0.02	2.833	$0.09	$0.13	128.91
Kentucky	10.56	$5.28	$0.02	2.873	$0.09	$0.13	143.11
Louisiana	9.37	$4.69	$0.02	2.716	$0.09	$0.12	152.47
Maine	16.16	$8.08	$0.03	3.061	$0.10	$0.14	99.63
Maryland	13.92	$6.96	$0.03	2.968	$0.10	$0.13	112.15
Massachusetts	21.11	$10.56	$0.04	2.962	$0.10	$0.13	73.80
Michigan	16.07	$8.04	$0.03	3.117	$0.10	$0.14	102.03
Minnesota	14.09	$7.05	$0.03	2.863	$0.09	$0.13	106.88
Mississippi	11.55	$5.78	$0.02	2.718	$0.09	$0.12	123.78
Missouri	13.23	$6.62	$0.03	2.75	$0.09	$0.13	109.33
Montana	11.85	$5.93	$0.02	3.01	$0.10	$0.14	133.61
Nebraska	11.31	$5.66	$0.02	2.906	$0.09	$0.13	135.15
Nevada	11.67	$5.84	$0.02	3.671	$0.12	$0.17	165.46
New Hampshire	19.63	$9.82	$0.04	2.95	$0.10	$0.13	79.05
New Jersey	15.64	$7.82	$0.03	3.078	$0.10	$0.14	103.52
New Mexico	13.37	$6.69	$0.03	2.976	$0.10	$0.14	117.08
New York	19.3	$9.65	$0.04	3.136	$0.10	$0.14	85.47
North Carolina	11.24	$5.62	$0.02	2.878	$0.09	$0.13	134.68
North Dakota	12.07	$6.04	$0.02	2.9	$0.09	$0.13	126.38
Ohio	12.64	$6.32	$0.02	2.998	$0.10	$0.14	124.76
Oklahoma	10.72	$5.36	$0.02	2.755	$0.09	$0.13	135.18
Oregon	11.02	$5.51	$0.02	3.489	$0.11	$0.16	166.53
Pennsylvania	14.38	$7.19	$0.03	3.178	$0.10	$0.14	116.25
Rhode Island	18.64	$9.32	$0.04	2.975	$0.10	$0.14	83.95
South Carolina	12.91	$6.46	$0.02	2.764	$0.09	$0.13	112.62
South Dakota	12.39	$6.20	$0.02	2.945	$0.10	$0.13	125.03
Tennessee	10.79	$5.40	$0.02	2.849	$0.09	$0.13	138.89
Texas	11.36	$5.68	$0.02	2.738	$0.09	$0.12	126.78
Utah	10.63	$5.32	$0.02	3.424	$0.11	$0.16	169.43
Vermont	18.5	$9.25	$0.04	2.978	$0.10	$0.14	84.67
Virginia	12.4	$6.20	$0.02	2.929	$0.09	$0.13	124.25
Washington	9.79	$4.90	$0.02	3.64	$0.12	$0.17	195.57
West Virginia	11.57	$5.79	$0.02	2.992	$0.10	$0.14	136.02
Wisconsin	14.28	$7.14	$0.03	2.904	$0.09	$0.13	106.97
Wyoming	12.3	$6.15	$0.02	3.178	$0.10	$0.14	135.90

Thanks!!

[CivilDiscourse]

Thanks!!

No problem. It was generally a question I had. "How much does it cost to charge an EV? What does that compare to a gas vehicle? Since they have differing ranges, what's a good comparison? I settled on cost per mile as a comparison, and then decided to convert the EV cost to an MPG cost equivalent.

I really had no idea what the cost comparison would come out at.

On average, for the Acura to match the Tesla 3, it would either need to get 122 MPG or the fuel cost would need to drop to a cost of between $0.82 and $0.58 per gallon.

Now this uses the Tesla 3's stated charge (50kwh) and range (263 miles), and the Acura's stated MPG for highway and city driving. This means that under actual driving conditions, these price comparisons aren't going to be completely accurate, but I think the overall difference in driving costs means that stuff has to shift dramatically for the price of gas vs the price of EV to switch.

I'll also say that I tried to be "fair" in comparisons. I didn't try to match the Tesla to an equivalent "class" car, but instead tried to match it to one that cost about the same in $$ that was a reasonably same type of car (sedan). My logic being that if you were looking at the Tesla 3, you were probably also looking at other cars at the same price range.

Also, I wasn't super choosey when I did my googling on average price per KwH by state, and average gas price per state. I can't guarantee that these prices are super recent, but I think they are close enough to give a good sense of comparison.

(This is fun for me. This sort of general spreadsheet comparison/number crunching is what I do for a living, with statistical modeling thrown in for good measure)

[Ronson]

Yes, but not to this extent, as witnessed to by the current record low levels in Lake Meade

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-ca...MT%20Thursday.

Winter snowfalls in the Sierra's have tended to be much lower than normal for about the last decade, and with higher temperatures, lower rainfall, and a low snowpack, and again the last two years, it's much worse than usual:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/...a-this-summer/

Source: above

A year like this one hasn’t happened often since California became a state. The seven-month period from July 1 to the end of February has been the seventh driest in San Francisco in the past 172 years, since 1849 when records began. And over the same time, the Northern Sierra Nevada, which is key to the state’s water supply, is suffering through it sixth driest season, according to calculations from Jan Null, a meteorologist with Golden Gate Weather Services in Half Moon Bay.

How much snow falls every winter is critical to California’s water picture. The snow, which forms a vast “frozen reservoir” over California’s 400-mile long Sierra mountain range, provides nearly one-third of the state’s water supply for cities and farms as it slowly melts in the spring and summer months. The melt sends billions of gallons of clean, fresh water flowing down dozens of rivers and streams into reservoirs.

© Copyright Original Source

And Southern California has warmed over 3 degrees in the last century.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production...-change-ca.pdf

making water evaporate all the more quickly and leaving things overall drier and hotter.

As you can see from the map in the link above, the western third of the US in general has been more strongly affected by climate change than the east, and since much of the west is a desert, that makes a water shortage year over year both more likely and more of a problem. It is seriously challenging the great water management projects that have made the west and large portions of the midwest habitable on such large scales, and such a massive producer of the world's food.

Most years when I lived in California (1960-2006) I heard gloom-and-doom predictions and forecasts from meteorologists claiming some particular year was the worst ever. Constant droughts, constant brush fires, normal stuff for California. And since California was barely inhabited before the gold rush (at least by anyone keeping records) it's not possible to say what is a normal year or not. There was a super tsunami in California in 1700 - long before the industrial revolution. I'm sure if it happened today it would be blamed on Climate Change.

[Ronson]

The arctic has warmed the most of any area, and the weather in Anchorage (for example) is nothing like it was when I lived there as a kid in the early '60s. It is significantly warmer now than it was then. And whereas S. CA has seen 3 degrees in the last century, Anchorage has seen over 3 degrees just since 1969! And the farther north you go, the worse it gets, with Northern Alaska a whopping 6 (5.8) degrees warmer on average than in 1969.

https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/how-climate-crisis-affecting-alaska


blog-alaska-2.png

I would recommend - in general - against forming one's opinions on scientific subjects from those that might believe the science but be too ignorant to communicate the results correctly.

Fair enough

[oxmixmudd]

Most years when I lived in California (1960-2006) I heard gloom-and-doom predictions and forecasts from meteorologists claiming some particular year was the worst ever. Constant droughts, constant brush fires, normal stuff for California. And since California was barely inhabited before the gold rush (at least by anyone keeping records) it's not possible to say what is a normal year or not. There was a super tsunami in California in 1700 - long before the industrial revolution. I'm sure if it happened today it would be blamed on Climate Change.

Well yes - warming has exceeded anything explainable by natural change since the mid 70's. So while you were there the effects of that warming were already fairly well underway. The effect didn't just move to the west this decade, it has been an ongoing trend. So, we were setting records then too, but they are not the records being set today - because now there is even more warming.

[Stoic]

But how do you deliver 100kw in 6 minutes? That is a device that can deliver 1,000,000 KwH.

To deliver 100kWH in 6 minutes, you need a megawatt charger.

How many of those can you hang off the grid till you bring the grid to it's knees if they are all in use at one time? I think the charging stations themselves will likely need a fairly significant mass storage capability or their own that can store energy when no-one is 'filling up', then deliver it independent of the grid when several cars are charging at the same time or one after the other.

A charging station should have power storage, just as a gas station has a storage tank.