"Every lead pipe in the country would be replaced. All Americans would have access to high-speed Internet broadband by the end of the decade. As many as 2 million homes and housing units would be built, retrofitted or renovated. Biden released the spending plan with a slew of tax hikes on businesses that is likely to be the most contentious part of his proposal. The White House says the proposal would pay for itself over 15 years because many of the tax increases would remain even as the spending proposals only last for eight years.... On the tax side, Biden’s plan includes raising the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent; increasing the global minimum tax paid from about 13 percent to 21 percent; ending federal tax breaks for fossil fuel companies; and ramping up tax enforcement against corporations, among other measures."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
242 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 242 of 242Last summer a client took me to lunch in his Tesla. He was low and wanted to charge which limited our choices.
The place he wanted to go had 3 chargers in use so on to plan b.
We get there and he hooked up to the charger. Pretty easy. Easier than gasping up.
Then we went in to eat. About the time the food arrived he got a text. His car was charged. He excused himself for 10 minutes while he disconnected and moved the car.
By his return our meals were cold. I asked why he didn't just leave the car till we were done.
Tesla charges left connected after charging. Not a trivial amount either. I think it might have been 50 cents or a dollar per minute after a 10 minute grace period.
I understand why and agree with Tesla. But it seems like it is a royal pain in the ass.
John Henry
"It's a ten-hour drive from here to SF. You wouldn't want to do that all in one go anyway."
You might not think so, but you don't know my family. I live in Idaho and drive straight through to get to SoCal when I go to visit family/friends. My best time is just over 13 hours. But that's nothing. Coming home from vacation one year, my father drove from Vancouver to SoCal, with stops for food and gas only. Oh, yeah- that's Vancouver, BC not Vancouver, WA.
Just sayin'.
"I asked why he didn't just leave the car till we were done.
Tesla charges left connected after charging. Not a trivial amount either."
I think simple decency calls for you to move your car so the next guy can get in.
"But it seems like it is a royal pain in the ass."
Seems like it to me too.
$100 Billion for New Public Schools
Isn't that like funding buggy whip factories?
I drove McPherson KS to Kalamazoo MI in February. By myself.
About 6 hours to des moines where I spent the night. Des moines to kazoo, about 9 hours due to horrible weather.
Other than overnight no stop longer than 15 minutes every 2-3 hours.
That's fairly typical for me when alone. I don't like to dawdle. Dm to kazoo this trip especially because of really nasty weather, expected to get worse.
John Henry
Original Mike said...
I think simple decency calls for you to move your car so the next guy can get in.
This lollygagging charge is something I'd not seen mentioned elsewhere.
Michelle? Other tesla owners? How much is the charge for leaving your car connected when charging is complete?
I agree about courtesy but we could see the charger from the table and nobody was waiting. Would it have been wrong to leave the car an extra 15 minutes to finish eating?
If there had not been a penalty.
John Henry
"Would it have been wrong to leave the car an extra 15 minutes to finish eating?"
Well, if you knew no one was waiting, seems OK.
Your story illustrates my attitude about the current state of EV cars; I don't see what I get as a compensation for the hassle.
I think simple decency calls for you to move your car so the next guy can get in.
See? in perfectly perfect world... Each and EVERY parking spot will have a (FREE!) charger... That will AUTOMATICALLY connect to your car.... And it will COMPLETELY charge your car: IN 5 SECONDS!!! FOR FREE!!!!
in a perfectly perfect world, EV's will be perfectly fine!!!
Just like Communism, EV's work PERFECTLY... In a perfectly perfect world
"Original Mike why are people assuming EV's will be the only vehicles in two vehicle households?"
Not everyone can afford 2 cars, or 10.00$ a gallon gas. Perhaps crushing poor people isn't really your goal, but that's the result of your policies.
I understand why and agree with Tesla. But it seems like it is a royal pain in the ass.
How often do you leave you car at the pump while you eat at a restaurant?
"If they really were ready, the hard sell wouldn't be necessary." Exactly. They didn't need to coerce people to buy a Model T, they were far better than horses. I feel the same way, I'll buy an EV when it makes sense and I can drive to Portland from San Francisco in one charge and put it on autopilot. Otherwise, why bother?
Gahrie said...
Are you REALLY, going to want to be forced to take your '30 minute leg stretches'
at charging stations? Or are you going to have to do those, and THEN stop at the diner you wanted to eat at?
Chances are, there's a already a charging station within walking distance of the diner if it's on a highway.*************
None of this "chances are" bullshit: People who own EVs must have maps showing where the charging stations are.
Show US where they are!!
"How often do you leave you car at the pump while you eat at a restaurant?"
Never. Literally never.
"How often do you leave you car at the pump while you eat at a restaurant?"
People might be tempted to if it took half an hour to fill the tank.
Or play your fellow utility customers for saps, use the power company as your "battery" and charge the car at night with coal. Or whatever your utility has.
I've seen people using their Tesla powerwalls as energy arbitrage assets, buying cheap energy at night from the grid, and then selling it back during the day for a higher price. Theoretically you could do the same with a Tesla, although I think the software prevents this.
I don't understand why charging your car at night is "playing" anybody. How is it any different from any other energy use at night?
None of this "chances are" bullshit: People who own EVs must have maps showing where the charging stations are.
Show US where they are!!
There are already half a dozen apps out there that do so, including Google.
Otherwise, why bother?
Safer to drive, cheaper fuel, lower maintenance costs and better performance.
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...
FWIW, we have taken the Tesla on numerous road trips, mostly to the Bay Area and back. The stations are close enough together that there is no trouble about recharging, except when some event gets in the way (one of our trips happened to coincide with a Tesla convention in AZ, and then we found fewer stations than cars). From here, it's Springfield, then Grant's Pass, then (I think) someplace round Mt. Shasta, then Corning, then depends which way you go. There's a supercharger in Petaluma, and now a bunch more round the Bay Area. Fremont, of course. Recharging honestly takes 45 minutes or so.
It's a ten-hour drive from here to SF. You wouldn't want to do that all in one go anyway.
>>
Speak for yourself.
I regularly did 16 hour road trips with the 5 minute breaks for bathroom and gas in the olden days. Admittedly now I'll fly.
Why do you want to take my choice away?
(Biden that is, Newsom, etc).
Gahrie said...
How often do you leave you car at the pump while you eat at a restaurant
Never. Because it takes 5 minutes or so. I do frequently leave the car at the pump while I go in to get a cup of coffee or a sandwich to go. Not if they are busy, of course.
But several here, I don't remember if you were one, suggested that the 30 minute charging time was a good time to eat lunch.
So you are saying I should stay with the car while charging and then eat lunch?
John Henry
Gahrie said...
How much did the government give Orville and Wilbur to design and build their plane?
None, they didn't believe it could be done. They gave them a shit ton immediately after they flew it however.
**********
What irrelevance, purportedly giving them money AFTER they proved their invention!
Here are the facts:
https://www.acc.af.mil/News/Commentaries/Display/Article/661822/the-contract-that-started-it-all/
You said "immediately". The first government contract came in 1908. That $25,000 "shit ton" of money was to BUILD airplanes, not spend it on hookers and booze.
There's more:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/04/tale-government-investment-lee-habeeb-mike-leven/
"Though the Wrights beat Langley and the Smithsonian, the race didn’t end there. Powerful interests vied for the patent to this revolutionary invention and, more important, for the credit for it. With Smithsonian approval, a well-known aviation expert modified Langley’s Aerodrome and in 1914 made some short flights designed to bypass the Wright brothers’ patent application and to vindicate the Smithsonian and its fearless leader, Samuel Langley.
That’s right. The Smithsonian’s brain trust couldn’t beat the bicycle-shop owners fair and square, so they used their power to steal the credit. And then they used their bully pulpit to rewrite history. In 1914, America’s most esteemed historical museum cooked the books and displayed the Smithsonian-funded Langley Aerodrome in its museum as the first manned aircraft heavier than air and capable of flight.
Orville Wright, who outlived his brother Wilbur, accused the Smithsonian of falsifying the historical record. So upset was he that he sent the 1903 Kitty Hawk Flyer, the plane that made aviation history, to a science museum in . . . London.
But truth is a stubborn thing. And in 1942, after much embarrassment, the Smithsonian recanted its false claims about the Aerodrome. The British museum returned the Wright brothers’ historic Flyer to America, and the Smithsonian put it on display in their Arts and Industries Building on December 17, 1948, 45 years to the day after the aircraft’s only flights. A grand government deception was at last foiled by facts and fate."
******
IOW the gummint backed a LOSER and could not admit it. My, my: when has that ever happened before...?
Gahrie, Althouse ought to have a tag called "GahrieBusllshit", reserved just for you.
End the tax breaks for intermittent/renewable energy. Clear the sociopolitical inoculation of Green technologies. End subsidies for gray products and services. And ramping up regulatory practices to favor industries, foreign and domestic, shared/shifted responsibility, among other measures.
Gahrie said...
You guys sound like all the people telling the Wright brothers they were wasting their time.....
Or the buggy makers making almost exactly the same arguments when ICE cars were introduced.
From wikipedia: The first electric car in the United States was developed in 1890–91 by William Morrison of Des Moines, Iowa; the vehicle was a six-passenger wagon capable of reaching a speed of 23 kilometres per hour (14 mph).
Electric automobiles in the early days were actually more common. And- batteries were developed long long before the first internal combustion engine. The Model T, the car of the masses, wasn't produced until 1908. Electric vehicles had a head start and lost to the ICE, badly.
The Stanley Steam car was produced long before the model T was. An external combustion engine should be able to beat the ICE in thermal efficiency. There have been other types of external combustion engines developed. The big thing that stops automotive innovations of any kind, well, the two big things are- government regulation, the legal industry. The latter stops all kinds of innovations. Disk brakes were available on bicycles in Europe a decadde bfor they were available here. And center pi;; calipers were also available in Europe with the same time lag to get here. Why? Well, center pull stop better than side pull, and disk brakes better yet- especially in wet conditions. "So, Mr. Bicycle Man, you sold bicycles with side pull brakes knowing that the disk brakes were better, and my client broke his legs because he couldn't stop in time during a pop up rainstorm. Defend your careless actions that caused these injuries!" That's why seat belts, followed by shoulder belts, and air bags, all didn't become common in everyday vehicles in the USA until government mandated them.
Can't recall the name, but a while back someone developed and built- apparently just for their own use- an external combustion closed loop drive system for an automobile and demonstrated it. (The Stanley Steamer was open loop- the steam was exhausted not condensed. Had to be filled up with water as it was filled up with fuel...) Like the Stanley Steamer- outstanding acceleration. But- it was different. He couldn't get and automobile company interested. But a closed loop steam (or vapor) system of any kind should be able to be engineered to beat the efficiency of any ICE- as well as the performance. Whether using turbine or piston engine. Or a rotary engine.
Batteries will never be as convenient as liquid fuel. Never. It's possible some affordable supercapacitor that could be charged in 5 minutes or less could be developed. You don't want to be near it if it's structural integrity fails in an accident. Anyone within a few feet- meaning everyone in the car- isn't going to survive the energy release. But then we run into the electrical distribution system problem- and the size of the charging cable problem. You're going to need a really thick wire to put 100 KWH (full charge of a Tesla) into a Tesla in 6 minutes, the time it takes you pump gas. And you have to wrestle that connector into place and make sure it's properly attached. I put 11 gallons into my Ioniq the other day. In about 5 minutes. Good for another >500 miles regardless of weather or temperature. That time includes putting my card in the slot, selecting the octane, filling the tank, and putting the hose back and gas cap back on.
Gahrie said...
I don't understand why charging your car at night is "playing" anybody. How is it any different from any other energy use at night?
It's not. I am a big fan of market/time of day electricity. It would go a long way to making the grid more efficient. I'd set my dryer to run at midnight, for example.
I would have no problem. I would actually encourage household batteries charged at midnite for use the next day.
My problem is people who put solar panels and, instead of storing the power in batteries during the day, sell it back to the utility. And I would not even have a problem with that if the utility paid what is called "avoided cost"
The grift that is problematic for me us govt mandated "net metering". The utility is required to buy the power at the same price they sell it. Running the meter backwards essentially.
There are huge costs to purchasing power in tiny retail amounts. The fellow utility customers are the ones paying the costs.
One of the costs is to linemen who can no longer de energize a line to work on it. They can open the switch from the substation. They can't stop every random homeowner from energizing the line.
They know how to work on hot lines and frequently do. Now they have to work as if every line is hot. Or could become hot without warning.
I don't take it as a given that EVs are ever going to reach the refueling rate of cars.
Blogger Bruce Hayden said...
“Or, maybe, just maybe, the Democrats stole the Presidency and control of rage Senate with north of a million illegal and often bogus fraudulent votes.”
Next thing you’ll try to say that the wuflu escaped from a lab
Stolen elections have consequences
My problem is people who put solar panels and, instead of storing the power in batteries during the day, sell it back to the utility.
Also, grid frequency instability. The sale is not made without a cost.
I don't take it as a given that EVs are ever going to reach the refueling rate of cars.
They're not. At least not in series, and not in parallel in close proximity. There are physical and thermodynamic barriers.
Go space,
Good point. 100kwh in 6 minutes is 1mw
Assume 240 volts, that is several thousand amps.
That is one hell of a lot of power to be forcing through a plug. Especially someone inexperienced with no protective gear.
And it is DC too, more dangerous in some ways than ac.
Not to mention, though you did, the 3/4" thick charging cables, 2 of them.
My ship in the navy was DC throughout. 600 volts going into a 50hp motor, ground strap to the hull coming out.
Lots of excitement and fireworks when things went askew, as they did daily.
John Henry
n.n said...
Also, grid frequency instability. The sale is not made without a cost
And capacity cost
And standby cost
And distribution costs
And transformer losses
And all sorts of other cost costs.
These are not a problem. All can be dealt with. The problem is who pays for them. The person incurring them should but under net metering doesn't.
Their fellow rate payers get it foisted on them.
It's a grift!
John Henry
Hydrocarbons are good for the environment... select environments. Mother Nature can be Pro-Choice, but She is generally Pro-Life. Oil is an organic nutrient for the smallest members of life on Earth. Carbon dioxide greens the Earth, where Green is a blight. Carbon molecules are the building blocks of little girls and boys, and pride parades, too. Roar!
After reading nearly all these comments I am convinced that I should stick with my gasoline powered vehicle.
Gahrie said, "I don't understand why charging your car at night is "playing" anybody. How is it any different from any other energy use at night?"
It's cheating at two different levels, one from the CO2 perspective and one from the economic.
Countless credulous articles from the media aside we really don't have any practical way to store energy, so when you charge your electric car at night there's a good chance the energy is coming from a fossil fuel power plant. If it's coming from coal then you are generating more CO2 than a gasoline powered car would generate. If it's coming from natural gas then you are generating a comparable amount of CO2 as a gasoline powered car would generate.
Nuclear power plants and hydroelectric power plants don't generate CO2 but it is disingenuous to give credit for their lack of emissions to electric cars, since these power plants were built a long time ago, and no new ones, apparently, are going to be built. And since these power plants would have been running even if electric cars didn't exist, then electric cars should never be given credit for this. (Although of course people disingenuously do. If they live in the Pacific northwest for instance electric car owners will say, oh, my energy comes from hydroelectric dams. Except as explained above, this is bullshit.)
And that leaves windmills -- and I tempted to digress and talk about the very serious and understated issues with windmills but I'll skip it for now.
So to sum up, if you charge your electric car at night -- and that is of course what most people will do -- then the difference between your CO2 emissions and that of your gasoline powered neighbor are far less than you think they are.
The second con is economic. In any state where there is significant amount of solar power installed, and California is an example of such already, the power companies have zero need for electric power in the middle of a bright, sunny day. On the contrary it is of negative value and they have to pay to get rid of it.
In a huge and hidden subsidy for solar power the government in many states forces the power companies to pay for solar power at times, which are almost most of the time because the power companies can't rely on the solar power being there, when the solar power is objectively worthless.
It's the consumer, of course, that pays for this huge subsidy with higher electricity prices across the board.
So you as a consumer are subsidizing the generation of electric power at night, which is mostly coming from fossil fuel power plants, and subsidizing getting rid of solar power during the middle of the day, and paying top dollar for it during the middle of the day, as if it were worth something.
1) Ending tax breaks for oil and gas companies? I translate that not mean that they will no longer be permitted to deduct their expenses from their gross revenues in calculating their net income for tax purposes. If you aren’t alarmed by this, then you need to go back and retake Tax I.
2) I read somewhere yesterday (maybe National Review) that the largest single item in the bill was $400 billion for home health workers, to hire more of them and to pay them more. This should be called the “Home Health Aide Support Bill,” not the “Infrastructure “ bill.
So to sum up, if you charge your electric car at night -- and that is of course what most people will do -- then the difference between your CO2 emissions and that of your gasoline powered neighbor are far less than you think they are.
I don't give a shit about that. EVs are better cars because they are better cars.
In a huge and hidden subsidy for solar power the government in many states forces the power companies to pay for solar power at times, which are almost most of the time because the power companies can't rely on the solar power being there, when the solar power is objectively worthless.
There is a clear and obvious answer that many are already taking advantage of... see "Elon Musk" and "South Australia". These giant batteries are already being built in the U.S.. Incidentally the money "wasted" by this is much less than the money wasted by having to buy energy from peaker plants during peak hours. The giant batteries eliminate the need for this too.
I assume, that we can take it as a Given? That Gahrie has a financial stake in EV's
At least; it Sure Sounds Like he's being paid off
Gahrie, I know about South Australia. There isn't enough lithium, and also I think cobalt -- that we know of anyway -- for both the giant storage batteries and the batteries in electric cars.
And also I'm seriously puzzled about the economics of these massive battery parks in South Australia. Given their cost, I assume this massively increases the cost of electricity in the province of South Australia. But then I also assume that cost has been partly hidden by money from the government?
Blogger Curious George said...
"...I sell EV Chargers. This is so dumb...."
So your expertise has a 'conflict of interest' since you 'suck on the government teat' for your business. EV cars would have never seen the light of day without wholesale government subsidies. The EV is not a organic product which is in high demand without subsidies. I'm OK with EVs being tested in the marketplace but without government subsidies. As the technology changes maybe they'll succeed. BTW, because of government subsidies other technologies have no chance of becoming a reality. So "Curious George" you've now become an expert on EV car products. Yet ignore the warnings of the CEO of Toyota who actually is an expert and has been in the EV/Hybrid business (over 20 years) far longer than Musk of Tesla. Toyota's hybrids have sold over 4 million cars. Amazing how the marketplace works without people like you "Curious George".
"I'm OK with EVs being tested in the marketplace but without government subsidies. As the technology changes maybe they'll succeed."
Seems fair enough. So, of course, this approach will never fly.
"BTW, because of government subsidies other technologies have no chance of becoming a reality."
But that's totes OK because it allows Nancy Pelosi to buy stock in the companies the government is putting its thumb on the scale for.
Right?
"I don't give a shit about that. EVs are better cars because they are better cars."
I'll repeat my former response. Until an EV can do the same thing an F150 can do it will always be a novelty. At best a commuter solution to urban driving. To be truly useful. I'm not saying efficient. You must be able to get the same fuel range as an f150 with a 4.8 liter engine. Your EV must have the same refill time as an F150 with a 26 gallon tank. Your EV must have the same load capacity as an F150. It must be as rugged as an F150. Until you can compete with the largest selling vehicle in the world you don't have shit. You might believe they are the best there is. But the rest of the vehicle consuming world do not share your prejudices.
John henry,
Michelle? Other tesla owners? How much is the charge for leaving your car connected when charging is complete?
I don't know; we've never been in that situation. (That is, if we stop to eat near a Supercharger, we've paid the bill and come back to the car before charging is complete.) But Tesla has been adding on various fees here and there. Only early adopters, for example, get free juice; if you buy a Tesla now, you're charged for the electricity. (Not sure how this works if you trade in your car; we've had ours for at least six years now, and the battery -- which is practically the whole car -- is only rated for eight, so I'd have to find out. My husband probably knows.)
There's a lot of Tesla problems that aren't shared by other cars. A few years ago, some idiot teenager on a bike, wearing headphones, blew a stop sign and slammed into the side of ours, making a long scratch down the side and a smallish dent. But bodywork is confined to Tesla dealerships, I think, and we still haven't fixed that. They keep trying to persuade us to sell rather than trade in, which of course means losing the free juice.
On the plus side, they keep adding new little apps and such. It's a mite unnerving to have your car "boot up" daily and not know quite what new might be on there, though; "the Internet of things" makes me nervous.
Post a Comment