3.573 TRILLION kWh is needed if 25% of all cars/trucks in USA are EVs. Would any of you EV supporters please refute that FACT?

[abu afak]

...In my example of the 19 gigawatts needed just to recharge the 1.9% of EV vehicles in California it would take a solar farm the size of a West Texas county and then it would only work when the sun was out.

By the way, West Texas counties are big. Very big.

Energy.gov

"..Could you power the US with Solar?

"...Solar's abundance and potential throughout the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of the nation's total land area – about the size of Lake Michigan – could supply enough electricity to power the entire United States.".."

.https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-united-states#:~:text=Solar's abundance and potential throughout,power the entire United States .

Solar Energy in the United States​

22,000 sq miles is ie, 110 miles by 200 miles
ie, 5500 sq miles in '4 corner' each state.... 70x80 miles each.
Yup, Not just Four Corners, but a very small portion of it's vast empty spaces.
and probably even a bit less since this article was written.. as it's more efficient every year.

22K miles is .0057% of the USA's 3.8 Million sq miles

And that doesn't include the fact is that WIND is now app Half the renewable generation.
So you can HALVE my number above to app 10,000 sq miles of Solar.
(100 miles x 100 miles) (ie, 50 miles x 50 miles if concentrated down to just 4 states.
Negligible if spread nationally/locally)

`

 

[candycorn]

Energy.gov

"..Could you power the US with Solar?

"...Solar's abundance and potential throughout the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of the nation's total land area – about the size of Lake Michigan – could supply enough electricity to power the entire United States.".."

.https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-united-states#:~:text=Solar's abundance and potential throughout,power the entire United States .

Solar Energy in the United States​

22,000 sq miles is ie, 110 miles by 200 miles
ie, 5500 sq miles in '4 corner' each state.... 70x80 miles each.
Yup, Not just Four Corners, but a very small portion of it's vast empty spaces.
and probably even a bit less since this article was written.. as it's more efficient every year.

22K miles is .0057% of the USA's 3.8 Million sq miles

And that doesn't include the fact is that WIND is now app Half the renewable generation.
So you can HALVE my number above to app 10,000 sq miles of Solar.
(100 miles x 100 miles) (ie, 50 miles x 50 miles if concentrated down to just 4 states.
Negligible if spread nationally/locally)

`

Solar is, at best, a component.

I don't understand why it isn't mandated that every new house or building have solar panels on top of them if they are available at the time of build. It is just ridiculous that we let this energy source go unharnessed.

 

[ReinyDays]

Am I reading this correctly .. 4.3 kW-hr / mile? ... that's 25¢ ... about double the fuel cost to a piston-engine rig (25 mpg @ $3/gal) ...

Some maintenance costs are the same; tires, insurance, DWI fines ... others are not, yes, we'll need to replace batteries in 8 years, but we've saved 32 trips to Lube-it USA ... [giggle] ... EVs don't have motor oil, spark plugs, condensors, water hoses, vacuum hoses, emission control hoses, timing belts, timing chains, timing gears, head gasket, valve cover gaskets, rear oil seals, front oils seals, bottom oil seals, top oil seals, air filters, fuel filters, oil filters ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Solar is, at best, a component.

I don't understand why it isn't mandated that every new house or building have solar panels on top of them if they are available at the time of build. It is just ridiculous that we let this energy source go unharnessed.

As a fully qualified and trained carpenter ... I can assure you that installing the roof pyres for solar panels is DIRT CHEAP when you are replacing your roofing ...

I'm sorry ... it's going to be insanely expensive to install these items at any other time ... and my bonding company will NOT insure such work, these points will be leaking rainwater until you re-roof and get these pyres properly flashed ...

Thus ... I agree with a government regulation requiring the PYRES to be installed, this is not financally onerous ... and then leave it to the homeowner whether they want solar or not ...

 

[candycorn]

As a fully qualified and trained carpenter ... I can assure you that installing the roof pyres for solar panels is DIRT CHEAP when you are replacing your roofing ...

I'm sorry ... it's going to be insanely expensive to install these items at any other time ... and my bonding company will NOT insure such work, these points will be leaking rainwater until you re-roof and get these pyres properly flashed ...

Thus ... I agree with a government regulation requiring the PYRES to be installed, this is not financally onerous ... and then leave it to the homeowner whether they want solar or not ...

Good to know.

 

[healthmyths]

Yawn...

From today's "we're doomed post"

View attachment 716204

We're going to have to build 1,191 new Nuke plants to meet the demand.
That was from today--if we got to 1/4 of TVs.

So bottom line:

25%=1,191 nuclear power plants. That is today's scare tactic.

Gee, from September--one month ago, your title was this:

View attachment 716207

100%=2,767 nuclear power plants. I guess the power plants get more powerful as you build more of them or something?


I know this will come as a grave shock to everyone but your math doesn't add up.

Again, get lost loser. Nobody is reading your bullshit posts and if they do, you sound more and more retarded.

I agree the first post was a mistake.
I had EV cars using .346 kWh to travel 1 mile AND the same for EV trucks!
But the mistake was making .346 kWh/mile the same for cars and trucks.
I was WRONG!!!
EV trucks use 4.3 kWh to travel one mile and as I've repeatedly pointed out, unlike YOU I don't come up with numbers, etc... but get the FACTS from the experts! Battery capacity and recharging needs for electric buses in city transit service (Journal Article) | DOE PAGES

in PHEV bucket trucks

A U.S. Department of Energy study found that increased electrification across all sectors of the economy could boost national consumption by as much as 38% by 2050, in large part because of electric vehicles.

Electric Cars Will Challenge State Power Grids • Stateline

SEATTLE — When Seattle City Light unveiled five new electric vehicle charging stations last month in an industrial neighborhood south of downtown, the electric utility wasn’t just offering a new spot for drivers to fuel up. It also was creating a way for the utility to figure out how much more...

www.pewtrusts.org

And note the caveat!!! Not if 25% of all cars and trucks become but "Increased" they didn't say how many!
But the attached shows if 25% of all cars/trucks are EVs the nation will need

 

[candycorn]

I agree the first post was a mistake.
I had EV cars using .346 kWh to travel 1 mile AND the same for EV trucks!
But the mistake was making .346 kWh/mile the same for cars and trucks.
I was WRONG!!!
EV trucks use 4.3 kWh to travel one mile and as I've repeatedly pointed out, unlike YOU I don't come up with numbers, etc... but get the FACTS from the experts! Battery capacity and recharging needs for electric buses in city transit service (Journal Article) | DOE PAGES View attachment 716344 in PHEV bucket trucks

A U.S. Department of Energy study found that increased electrification across all sectors of the economy could boost national consumption by as much as 38% by 2050, in large part because of electric vehicles.

Electric Cars Will Challenge State Power Grids • Stateline

SEATTLE — When Seattle City Light unveiled five new electric vehicle charging stations last month in an industrial neighborhood south of downtown, the electric utility wasn’t just offering a new spot for drivers to fuel up. It also was creating a way for the utility to figure out how much more...

www.pewtrusts.org

And note the caveat!!! Not if 25% of all cars and trucks become but "Increased" they didn't say how many!
But the attached shows if 25% of all cars/trucks are EVs the nation will need

You’ve never been right.

 

[ReinyDays]

Are you taking in to account that we're removing 90% of passenger vehicles off the roads? ... fat lazy meat-eaters are going to have to walk to work ... ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

 

[healthmyths]

Energy.gov

"..Could you power the US with Solar?

"...Solar's abundance and potential throughout the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of the nation's total land area – about the size of Lake Michigan – could supply enough electricity to power the entire United States.".."

.https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-united-states#:~:text=Solar's abundance and potential throughout,power the entire United States .

Solar Energy in the United States​

22,000 sq miles is ie, 110 miles by 200 miles
ie, 5500 sq miles in '4 corner' each state.... 70x80 miles each.
Yup, Not just Four Corners, but a very small portion of it's vast empty spaces.
and probably even a bit less since this article was written.. as it's more efficient every year.

22K miles is .0057% of the USA's 3.8 Million sq miles

And that doesn't include the fact is that WIND is now app Half the renewable generation.
So you can HALVE my number above to app 10,000 sq miles of Solar.
(100 miles x 100 miles) (ie, 50 miles x 50 miles if concentrated down to just 4 states.
Negligible if spread nationally/locally)
`

You are forgetting an extremely major additional land requirement: Transmission of the electricity.
To do 75% of all cars/trucks to be EVs... you need 20,004,169,902 panels or 10,763 sq miles that will cost
about $7,680,000 per sq mile or $82,661,859,100 for the land? Who will pay for it?
Who will pay the $4,000,833,980,440 for the solar panels @ $200/ panel?
But again how are you going to transmit the 14.8 Trillion kWh of power from the 10,763 sq miles of solar panels?

 

[healthmyths]

You’ve never been right.

but you never put any truth up! Like what you just wrote! "YOU'VE never been right"! Wow! I KNOW I'm right about this
fact: YOU never substantiate anything you put up! Where are your links. Who are you to make such a dumb comment?

 

[candycorn]

but you never put any truth up! Like what you just wrote! "YOU'VE never been right"! Wow! I KNOW I'm right about this

Like you knew you were right about Obama care?

Like you just admitted you were wrong about something last month.

fact: YOU never substantiate anything you put up!

False.

Where are your links.

I can't link to something that disproves your fantasy about needing 1200 new nuke plants to roll out electric vehicles when we haven't built more than a handful (if that many) and they are currently a pretty common sight on the roadways.

I mean, when I fly into Austin, we go right by the zip-code-sized TESLA plant they are building there. Are you really going to state that they are churning out thousands of cars every year based on the speculation that there will be 1,200 nuclear plants built?

You're posts are straight out of never-never-land.

Who are you to make such a dumb comment?

I guess you want the market to yourself?

 

[healthmyths]

Like you knew you were right about Obama care?

Like you just admitted you were wrong about something last month.

False.

I can't link to something that disproves your fantasy about needing 1200 new nuke plants to roll out electric vehicles when we haven't built more than a handful (if that many) and they are currently a pretty common sight on the roadways.

I mean, when I fly into Austin, we go right by the zip-code-sized TESLA plant they are building there. Are you really going to state that they are churning out thousands of cars every year based on the speculation that there will be 1,200 nuclear plants built?

You're posts are straight out of never-never-land.

I guess you want the market to yourself?

Regarding Tesla churning out cars. Read carefully the following as the DOE speculates 38% increase in electricity usage.
Where will that come from?

• 4,116,000,000,000 Total electricity generated in USA today in 2021 by coal,nuclear,gas.
• 49,030,000,000 EIA estimates generated with small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) systems.
• 4,165,030,000,000 Total electricity generated in USA in 2021
  Electricity generation, capacity, and sales in the United States - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
• 11,070 total power plants in usa Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
• Total power by these 11,070 coal, nuclear and gas plants of 4,116,000,000,000 divided by 11,070 plants equals 371,815,718 kWh./Plant.
• So Dummies like you can't seem to follow this BUT if 38% MORE consumption (according to Department of energy study ) projected by 2050 that means a total of 1,564,080,000,000 kWh (38% more than today...) or divided by 371,815,718 kWh per generation plant...
• EVs could drive 38% rise in US electricity demand, DOE lab finds
• 4,206 additional plants will need to be built in the next 27 years... 156 per year!
• Now dummies like you Candycorn.... given the FACTS that it takes 10 years from planning to construction to production for a power plant this means starting this year there has to be 156 power plants per year being planned, constructed and in production each year to meet the demand of 1,564,080,000,000 kWh (38% more than today) by 2050!
• USA TODAY compiled its own list of 177 planned and proposed natural gas plants through August, using data from S&P Global Market Intelligence, which tracks power plants that have been officially announced, and the Sierra Club, which tracks proposed plants.
  
  Of those, 152 have a scheduled opening date of between 2019 and 2033, though only 130 have specific locations chosen. An additional 25 are part of companies’ long-term planning processes and don’t have estimated opening dates yet.
• 

  As Earth faces climate catastrophe, US set to open nearly 200 power plants

  There are as many as 177 natural gas power plants currently planned, under construction or announced in the United States.

  www.usatoday.com

FOLKS... we have a problem! ONLY 152 will be opening between now and 2033!

AND we need 4,206 just to meet the statement by the Department of Energy's 38% MORE electricity needed by 2050!!!

 

[abu afak]

You are forgetting an extremely major additional land requirement: Transmission of the electricity.
To do 75% of all cars/trucks to be EVs... you need 20,004,169,902 panels or 10,763 sq miles that will cost
about $7,680,000 per sq mile or $82,661,859,100 for the land? Who will pay for it?
Who will pay the $4,000,833,980,440 for the solar panels @ $200/ panel?
But again how are you going to transmit the 14.8 Trillion kWh of power from the 10,763 sq miles of solar panels?
View attachment 716379

I've already asked you for a Source page, LINK for this riDICKulous Chart
YES or NO?
If NO, I'll assume it's MagaMoron.com
and asked for the OP to be deleted.
'
`

 

[Flash]

It's a given that there are big numbers in energy production.
It's a given that a lot more electric power production will be needed.
Almost all midsized cars get less than 30 mpg. Almost all electric cars get over 100 mpg. That is a great savings in energy.

If new power plants were built to burn less refined oil, the carbon footprint would be dropped considerably because of the fact that, at most, 1/3 the energy would be required for EVs. Also the fuel cost of burning a cruder hydrocarbon at a central location would be lower.

EVs allow more flexibility on what energy sources are used to create the electricity. The trade off is fewer Texas refineries vs more electric energy generation. EV production and power plant production can happen at the same pace over time.
.

Fossil fuel is stored up solar.

If we are not going use stored up solar to power our vehicles then we will have to generate more energy some way or another.

Since it takes almost 20 Gigawatts of NEW energy production just to charge less than 2% of the EVs in California just think what the energy load would have to be nationwide for a greater percentage of EVs.

The amount is staggering. In Physics (just like Economics) their ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Flash]

Energy.gov

"..Could you power the US with Solar?

"...Solar's abundance and potential throughout the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of the nation's total land area – about the size of Lake Michigan – could supply enough electricity to power the entire United States.".."

.https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-united-states#:~:text=Solar's abundance and potential throughout,power the entire United States .

Solar Energy in the United States​

22,000 sq miles is ie, 110 miles by 200 miles
ie, 5500 sq miles in '4 corner' each state.... 70x80 miles each.
Yup, Not just Four Corners, but a very small portion of it's vast empty spaces.
and probably even a bit less since this article was written.. as it's more efficient every year.

22K miles is .0057% of the USA's 3.8 Million sq miles

And that doesn't include the fact is that WIND is now app Half the renewable generation.
So you can HALVE my number above to app 10,000 sq miles of Solar.
(100 miles x 100 miles) (ie, 50 miles x 50 miles if concentrated down to just 4 states.
Negligible if spread nationally/locally)

`

You don't know what you are talking about.

I am a retired Environmental Engineer. I retired in 2003. Later on I did a little post retirement Engineering consulting work.

The company I was working for got a contract to help put together an NRC permit application for an expansion of a nuclear power plant in Texas. Back then President Bush was allowing the permits. It was going to be a 10 Gigawatt expansion reactor.

One of the things the NRC permitting process required was to evaluate alternative energy production technologies. We had to look at fossil fuels, solar, wind and hydro. We had to look at all the economic and engineering factors to determine if the nuclear was the most viable.

There were four of us Engineers working on that section. It took us three weeks and when we finished our section of the permit it was 250 pages.

What we found when when we looked into solar that it it would have taken a solar field larger than the size of the county that the plant was in to provide 10 Gigawatts. Then that was only with ideal solar emissions. It wasn't even close to being a viable alternative to the nuclear plant as was wind. Gas, coal and oil were viable alternatives both from an engineering and technology standpoint.

Solar is shitty technology and you stupid uneducated Moon Bats are simply too damn stupid to understand.

It will take 19 Gigawatts of ADDITIONAL power just to recharge the less than 2% of the vehicles in California that are the stupid L-I technology. That is the size of the two nuclear reactors at Diablo Canyon. One of the largest nuclear power generating facilities in the world.

More than all of Death Valley would have to be covered in the stupid solar shit in order to generate what Diablo Canyon generates.

 

[Wuwei]

Since it takes almost 20 Gigawatts of NEW energy production just to charge less than 2% of the EVs in California just think what the energy load would have to be nationwide for a greater percentage of EVs.

The amount is staggering. In Physics (just like Economics) their ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

You are being taken in by a big number. The amount of energy used in the US is always even more staggering. EVs will lower the amount of energy used to 30% of combustion engines. That sounds like an overall win to me no matter the source of the energy.
.

 

[abu afak]

....when we looked into solar that it it would have taken....

You LOW IQ obsolete Clown!
Solar has gotten 90% more cost and tech efficient per KwH than it was in 2010, much less 2003.
Go Away Flinstone.
LOL

My post/claim was linked to Energy.gov near 2 years go, and solar does nothing but get better every year.
You and your 'take' is 'Graybage.'
`

 

[Flash]

You are being taken in by a big number. The amount of energy used in the US is always even more staggering. EVs will lower the amount of energy used to 30% of combustion engines. That sounds like an overall win to me no matter the source of the energy.
.

19 Gigawatts of ADDITIONAL power generation in California just to have the capacity to keep 1.9% of the vehicles on the road going is staggering.

ICE vehicles can be very fuel efficient if that is what you desire. They can also be very inefficient if that is what you want.

My wife bought a 2019 Honda CRV. It got almost 30 MPG around town and almost 40 on the highway if it was driven less than 75 MPH. Last year she traded in on a Honda Pilot that was bigger and the gas mileage is less. She wanted a larger vehicle. I have a gas guzzling Tundra truck with a big V-8. If good mileage was a factor for me I could get something much more fuel efficient. It is my choice to drive the gas guzzler.

My point being that yes it is true that we have some pretty inefficient ICE vehicles but if our goal is to have efficient ones then we can without having to go EVs. Even hybrids would be better than L-I vehicles.

I have not looked up the data so I don't know if your assertion that it is more efficient to generate power at a central location and distribute it through the electrical gird to charge notoriously inefficient L-I batteries packs is really true or not. I am sure there are some Environmental Wackos or people in the battery industry that would claim it but I would like to see how it was calculated. Typically those kind of assertions are usually flawed.

You have given me something to consider and I will do a little research.

By the way, being a real Engineer I have no problem is using the best technology for the application. I have seen nothing that indicates L-I batteries are the best technology for transportation just like I have seen nothing to prove that solar or wind power generation is viable.

 

[Flash]

You LOW IQ obsolete Clown!
Solar has gotten 90% more cost and tech efficient per KwH than it was in 2010, much less 2003.
Go Away Flinstone.
LOL

My post/claim was linked to Energy.gov near 2 years go, and solar does nothing but get better every year.
You and your 'take' is 'Graybage.'
`

LOL! Back when I had that nuclear power plant permitting project I was paid $250/hr to calculate the engineering data for the viablity of solar power generation for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

You get your silly shit off Google.

Go fuck yourself Moon Bat.

 

[healthmyths]

I've already asked you for a Source page, LINK for this riDICKulous Chart
YES or NO?
If NO, I'll assume it's MagaMoron.com
and asked for the OP to be deleted.
'
`

I CREATED the CHART! And if you were smart enough you could see the sources of the information!
I'm 100% confident though you won't visit AS I DID the below web sites to gather the information.
It took a little time but even you could do it if you had the intelligence and patience!

INFOGRAPHIC: How Much Power Does A Nuclear Reactor Produce?

A typical nuclear reactor produces 1 gigawatt of power per plant on average. Just how much power is that exactly?

www.energy.gov

cost per nuclear plant https://www.cmu.edu/ceic/assets/docs/seminar-files/2006-2007/carl-bozzuto-seminar.pdf

https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/

kWh per truck...https://www.osti.gov/pages/servlets/purl/1342660

Battery capacity and recharging needs for electric buses in city transit service (Journal Article) | DOE PAGES

The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Scientific and Technical Information

www.osti.gov

Electricity generation, capacity, and sales in the United States - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) total power plants in usa Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

How Many Solar Panels Do I Need? Calculate for Your Home

Find out how many solar panels your home needs in 2024 with key factors like energy usage, location, and efficiency.

www.solarreviews.com

How Much Do Solar Panels Cost? (Jun 2024)

A typical residential solar panel system costs $12,000 to $30,000 (or more)

www.consumeraffairs.com

As Earth faces climate catastrophe, US set to open nearly 200 power plants

There are as many as 177 natural gas power plants currently planned, under construction or announced in the United States.

www.usatoday.com