WetEV
Posts: 3307
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:32 pm

GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:48 pm
Nope. Since a fair portion of the public sometimes make those road trips, and wants a car capable of them in any case, providing a ZEV that can do so is necessary, because they obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs without being bribed/forced to do so. After all, every generation of BEVs has increased both battery capacity and charging rate, but we're still only at 2.3% take rate nationwide,
Not a static situation, so you can't say anything about "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs".

Knowledge about BEVs is not static. A fairly high percentage thinks an electric car uses gasoline.

Even if everyone today was demanding a BEV, manufacturing capacity to deliver much more than 2.3% of the market doesn't exist, and will not exist for years.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11371
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:55 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:48 pm
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:29 pm


That right there is pushing fuel cells. With the model 3 and soon model y, there's zero justification to consider any other fuel type except for the most extreme road-trip cases.

Nope. Since a fair portion of the public sometimes make those road trips, and wants a car capable of them in any case, providing a ZEV that can do so is necessary, because they obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs without being bribed/forced to do so. After all, every generation of BEVs has increased both battery capacity and charging rate, but we're still only at 2.3% take rate nationwide, around 8% in California, despite perks and subsidies, and sales have stagnated (PEV sales down Y-o-Y for July, August and September; IEVS is changing to a quarterly report so hasn't given numbers for October).

FCEVs remain even less cost-effective in the long-term at the moment due to high fuel costs, which (along with the vehicle cost and lack of infrastructure) would have to be improved before they can achieve mass market acceptance. But their operational characteristics are essentially the same as ICEs now, so we know the general public will be comfortable with them given the necessary improvements noted above. No BEV can say the same yet.

Again with your mindless prose. How far does this "fair portion of the public" need to go? By deliberately avoiding specifics, you're hiding behind glittering generalities. Citing BEV sales numbers is a non-sequitor about a BEV's capabilities.

I suppose I could respond in kind with unnecessary insults, but I'll refrain. BEV sales are hardly a non-sequitur when we're talking about the acceptability of current BEVs to the general public, especially when we know that the three top reasons the general public cite for not being interested in them, in varying order, are price, range and infrastructure. You know, their capabilities and value?


Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
I regularly make my LA-SF road trip (~400 miles) in roughly the same time as a combustion car (since I don't have to get gas before driving, and I still need to eat along the way). That sure does sound like a BEV that handles a road trip that a fair number of the public takes.

If you can do the LA-SF trip in a time that is the same for you, terrific. On the rare occasions that I've done it I've usually done it non-stop. Different strokes for different folks. Do you do multi-state road trips, especially off-interstate to places like national parks? I do, and so do lots of other people judging by the visitation numbers.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
Not to mention that I can drive east towards destinations that an FCEV can NOT make

Because the infrastructure hasn't been built yet, which as I've repeated ad nauseum is a pre-condition for ANY transportation tech to succeed, FCEV, BEV, ICE, NG or steam FTM.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
contradicting your below point about supporting "any ZEV or at least zero-carbon tech that has the potential to get us off fossil fuels soonest". Anyone can see that an H2 infrastructure will take the most money and the most amount of time to deploy to any state remotely resembling a "road-tripable" infrastructure. You're well aware that you need at least half as many H2 stations as gas stations, otherwise consumers have to drive significantly out of their way just to find a refilling station.

Sure, eventually, once the volume builds to that point. OTOH, with even the shortest-range current FCEV capable of going say 250 miles plus a reserve between fill-ups with no worries, you only need 15 to do I-80 (2,900 miles) from end to end, actually two less, as the furthest east one in California is at mile 185, and any regional network can also be much less dense than a QC one has to be. Naturally the more dense they are, the more cars can be served and the more flexibly the cars can be used. Feel free to read the annual reports from 2014 to 2019 that California has provided and I've linked here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9506&hilit=ev+bibliography#p214885

As California by itself has already subsidized 43 stations which are open and plans to subsidize 200 total, to say that it's impossible to afford an H2 station network spanning the country's primary interstates in addition to the (smaller, owing to current FCEV's greater range) regional networks is ridiculous. Of course, the costs have to be (and have been, albeit not yet enough) brought down so that these stations can be built and operated profitably, but the same holds true for QCs, none of which AFAIA do so yet. Certainly they've virtually all been built and often run with government or corporate (Tesla) subsidies.


Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:48 pm
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:29 pm
Mind you, you once advocated for fuel cells, because the damage from diesel was so bad that we absolutely had to get rid of fossil fuels at ALL costs.

I supported (and support) any ZEV or at least zero-carbon tech that has the potential to get us off fossil fuels soonest, BEVs and fuel cells being two of them, and will recommend whichever one best fits the specific operational requirements. In the case of over-the-road trucking, that's FCEVs for now, but P&D and (shorter distribution runs) are a good match for pure BEV capability. Local/express buses can go either way depending on requirements, emergency vehicles shouldn't be BEVs, and so on.

Similarly, if someone needs a car primarily for shorter-range commuting, then a BEV is probably right for them if they have convenient, dedicated charging. If not, then an FCEV may be a better fit, and for an all-around ZEV, I believe a PHFCEV with the stack used as a fuel extender is generally the best-suited given the necessary infrastructure to support both modes (with improvements as above). If BEVs, their price. infrastructure and operational characteristics improve to the point that the general public is willing to accept them for all-around use, great.

Note that the above ignores the possible effects of resource limitations on both techs which may retard or limit their growth, which is another reason why I think we should proceed with both, as their critical resource requirements aren't identical.
Local buses are already BEV (many municipalities are switching to them).

Uh huh, and some municipalities that have done so have found that those BEV buses are incapable of meeting the service requirements and are taking them out of service or having to restrict them to only certain routes, and in at least one case, suing the manufacturer.


Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
And there's no reason why emergency vehicles should NOT be BEV.

Ambulances don't travel very far and are parked when not traveling between sites. And they're usually traveling 65mph or less on the highways. Having fast chargers at the hospital for their use should help extend the range. FireTrucks always return back to their home station and operate locally. The only reason battery-powered emergency vehicles aren't available yet, is because they haven't been designed and built yet.

You're kidding, right? :o In the recent fires as well as in past years we've had fire trucks and crews drive in from out of the region as well as out of the state fighting fires. And we've also already had at least one instance of a Tesla police car having to abandon a chase because it ran out of charge. And do you really want ambulance patients to be told, "sorry, we can't get you to the hospital in a hurry right now, because we have to take it slowly or else stop to charge"? That's ridiculous, even ignoring the effect of widespread power outages.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
Also, your proselytizing the fuel cell alter by blindly panning the actual capabilities of BEV's. Saying that you recommend "whichever one best fits the specific operational requirements", while downplaying the capabilities of a BEV and promoting the capabilities of FCEV's despite a significant lack of infrastructure (that's an operational requirement no matter how you want to spin it), is pulling a Sarah Huckabee Sanders - you're saying things that don't match your actions.

See my comments in another post on monitoring the development (and current lack of same) of the necessary charging infrastructure to get me to one of my more common trip destinations for an answer to that.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:57 pm
Lastly, you haven't lived with a BEV, so you still carry the mis-perceptions of what BEV's can do. Can you really say that you're effective at convincing people to get off of fossil fuels as quickly as possible when you don't know the products you're selling?

This again. How does living with a BEV (for more than the week I did, testing its capabilities) alter its battery capacity or energy efficiency at various speeds under various conditions, improve its range, its charging speed, its price, or the amount of energy it uses running the HVAC system? Even if I hadn't experienced that for myself, I've also worked extensively with deep-cycle batteries, and of course I've been reading accounts of numerous BEV owners for 8 years here and elsewhere that provide specifics on a given BEV's capabilities under varying conditions. Are all of their accounts (including yours) as well as numerous reviews inadequate to determine whether or not a BEV can meet a set of operational requirements? That's nonsense, and you know it.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11371
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:02 pm

WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:32 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:48 pm
Nope. Since a fair portion of the public sometimes make those road trips, and wants a car capable of them in any case, providing a ZEV that can do so is necessary, because they obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs without being bribed/forced to do so. After all, every generation of BEVs has increased both battery capacity and charging rate, but we're still only at 2.3% take rate nationwide,

Not a static situation, so you can't say anything about "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs".

Knowledge about BEVs is not static. A fairly high percentage thinks an electric car uses gasoline.

Even if everyone today was demanding a BEV, manufacturing capacity to deliver much more than 2.3% of the market doesn't exist, and will not exist for years.

We've had production BEVs available now for 9 years, with range tripling for the same price, yet the general public still isn't flocking to them. I'd call that "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs"; others may differ. So, while the public's attitude may not be static, it sure as hell isn't showing any great amount of improved interest. I think we're at least one and maybe two more generations away. Get affordable BEVs with 300+ or better yet 350+ mile ranges and the charging infrastructure to match, available in the types of vehicles they want, and they may be ready to accept them.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3307
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:25 pm

GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:02 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:32 pm
Not a static situation, so you can't say anything about "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs".

Knowledge about BEVs is not static. A fairly high percentage thinks an electric car uses gasoline.

Even if everyone today was demanding a BEV, manufacturing capacity to deliver much more than 2.3% of the market doesn't exist, and will not exist for years.

We've had production BEVs available now for 9 years, with range tripling for the same price, yet the general public still isn't flocking to them. I'd call that "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs"; others may differ. So, while the public's attitude may not be static, it sure as hell isn't showing any great amount of improved interest. I think we're at least one and maybe two more generations away. Get affordable BEVs with 300+ or better yet 350+ mile ranges and the charging infrastructure to match, available in the types of vehicles they want, and they may be ready to accept them.
Notice again that even if we had public demand for 100% BEVs, they couldn't be made for years.

9 years ago the market share was what? How many BEVs sold in 2010? And today 2.3%. Things have changed, and are continuing to change. Not just in the capabilities of BEVs, but in the spread of knowledge about BEVs.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:50 pm

GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:55 pm

If you can do the LA-SF trip in a time that is the same for you, terrific. On the rare occasions that I've done it I've usually done it non-stop. Different strokes for different folks. Do you do multi-state road trips, especially off-interstate to places like national parks? I do, and so do lots of other people judging by the visitation numbers.
Lassen, Zion, and Joshua Tree so far. The funny thing about all those places is that the campsites have 240v RV outlets that charges an EV (even a chevy bolt) just fine. KLA sites are the best, but any place with 120v outlets can still work.

The sooner you realize you're arguing from a point of ignorance, the easier it will be to have an actual discussion with you.

The rest of your points were all applied out-of-context, so there's no point in rehashing old arguments with them.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

GRA
Posts: 11371
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Nov 06, 2019 4:54 pm

WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:25 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:02 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:32 pm
Not a static situation, so you can't say anything about "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs".

Knowledge about BEVs is not static. A fairly high percentage thinks an electric car uses gasoline.

Even if everyone today was demanding a BEV, manufacturing capacity to deliver much more than 2.3% of the market doesn't exist, and will not exist for years.

We've had production BEVs available now for 9 years, with range tripling for the same price, yet the general public still isn't flocking to them. I'd call that "obviously aren't ready to accept the current capability of BEVs"; others may differ. So, while the public's attitude may not be static, it sure as hell isn't showing any great amount of improved interest. I think we're at least one and maybe two more generations away. Get affordable BEVs with 300+ or better yet 350+ mile ranges and the charging infrastructure to match, available in the types of vehicles they want, and they may be ready to accept them.
Notice again that even if we had public demand for 100% BEVs, they couldn't be made for years.

9 years ago the market share was what? How many BEVs sold in 2010? And today 2.3%. Things have changed, and are continuing to change. Not just in the capabilities of BEVs, but in the spread of knowledge about BEVs.

Despite 9 years of education, U.S. market demand has been decreasing for the past three months, while the majority of sales are repeat sales to existing BEV customers. This is not the kind of change needed and isn't an encouraging trend, especially as the biggest BEV seller is about to lose their last federal subsidy in less than two months, and the best-selling non-Tesla BEV in the U.S. will also do so three months after that. I expect to see a sales spike for Tesla as the expiration approaches, especially in December, but then what? Sure, the Model Y will be a more popular body style, but it's also supposed to be about $5k more expensive than the Model Y, pricing it out of mass-market territory.

Re your point about how battery production capacity will limit the number of BEVs produced for some time, quite agree, which is why I'd rather see those batteries used in much larger numbers of more affordable HEVs and PHEVs in the interim, reducing GHGs and fossil-fuel use sooner at lower cost. Then, once production facilities have grown we can eliminate the last 30% or whatever of fossil-fuel miles. That assumes that raw material shortages on cobalt, copper or what have you don't impose their own limits on expanding production.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11371
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:36 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:50 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:55 pm

If you can do the LA-SF trip in a time that is the same for you, terrific. On the rare occasions that I've done it I've usually done it non-stop. Different strokes for different folks. Do you do multi-state road trips, especially off-interstate to places like national parks? I do, and so do lots of other people judging by the visitation numbers.
Lassen, Zion, and Joshua Tree so far. The funny thing about all those places is that the campsites have 240v RV outlets that charges an EV (even a chevy bolt) just fine. KLA sites are the best, but any place with 120v outlets can still work.

The sooner you realize you're arguing from a point of ignorance, the easier it will be to have an actual discussion with you.

The rest of your points were all applied out-of-context, so there's no point in rehashing old arguments with them.

Lassen, Zion and Joshua Tree. Good. I note that all are reasonably accessible from QCs/SCs on nearby interstates. Of course, you had to stay at campgrounds with charging, or RV parks, neither of which I have any interest in doing. Let's see you charge your car at the trailheads I'm normally driving to and hiking/backpacking from, which lack electricity and usually any other facilities.

So let's talk about my 'ignorance'. I've driven U.S. 50 across Nevada/Utah to Interstate 70 4 times (3 E/B. 1 W/B). There is still no way to drive U.S. 50 using only QCs. One Model X owner did it, and had to stay at an RV campground one night and IIRR spend a few hours charging at another to make it, instead of simply being able to driving it non-stop except for one or two gas stops after leaving Reno, as I've done repeatedly.

I drove it to visit or return from Great Basin, Arches, Canyonlands, Natural Bridges, Capitol Reef, Bryce, Zion, and/or Rocky Mountain NPs/NMs. On one trip I did a loop, starting at Canyonlands (3 day backpack), then Natural Bridges (overnight stay, forenoon day hike), drove through Capitol Reef on the way to Bryce (overnight stay, morning and afternoon day hikes), drove to Zion, stayed a couple of nights while day hiking, and then home. With the exception of Zion, none of the locations mentioned have charging at the places I need them; in most cases, they have no charging or electricity, period.

For example, Wheeler Peak campground in Great Basin is at 10,000 feet, and the campground improvements consist of a table and (maybe) a pit toilet nearby, I forget. The park had only been open a year or two at the time, and it does have toilets now, and they even truck water in during the summer. And that's one of the more developed sites I've camped at - more typically, my car is parked at a trailhead where camp is either the back of my car or any reasonably flat spot - the improvements list is typically as follows: no water, no power, no table, no toilet, just sky, dirt, rocks, trees and brush.

Or maybe you'd care to tell me how I'm supposed to get to Glacier National Park and return using QCs/SCs, hopefully before the last glacier disappears? Tesla's had an SC in Kalispell listed as coming soon for more than 3 years now, and ones in Helena, Great Falls and Shelby for at least the past two years likewise, but vaporware isn't going to charge a car, nor will the equally vaporous SC in Kayenta allow me to revisit Monument Valley.

How about Black Canyon of the Gunnison and Mesa Verde N.P.s and Dinosaur NM in Colorado? Haven't been to any of them yet (I drove past Dinosaur on U.S. 40 on the way back from Rocky Mtn. to SLC once), but Colorado is supposed to build QCs (Chargepoint) that will provide access to them, although they've reported zero progress since announcing the grants, and none of the 33 sites has opened yet.

As for California, since I'm not interested in a Tesla I've been monitoring all the EA, EVgo, CEC and other sites needed to give me access to the places I want to go in state. As noted in my recent post in the "Expanding EVs in Yosemite" topic, two weeks ago I visited a total of six charging sites (5 QCs, 1 L2 only) that are more or less on my way to Lee Vining from home:

Of the six, only three are open yet. Of those not yet open,

One (EA) is too close to home to be any use in any case, except maybe on the return trip.

Another (EA requires that I go 25 miles/40 minutes out of my way via another Hwy to use it.

The third site (CEC) is the one that would be of most use to me, once it opens, but that's not going to happen until after fire season.

As for the open sites:

One's (CEC) a bit too far west to be really useful, and requires an extra charging stop somewhere.

The one furthest east (CEC) only has a single QC, and thus can't be relied on.

The last, in Lee Vining (ESEVA), is the L2 site which opened in September, and is better than nothing, but what's really needed are some QCs here.


Yeah, you're right, I'm completely ignorant of what's needed to make a BEV useful for me.
Last edited by GRA on Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:40 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:49 pm

GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:36 pm
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:50 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:55 pm

If you can do the LA-SF trip in a time that is the same for you, terrific. On the rare occasions that I've done it I've usually done it non-stop. Different strokes for different folks. Do you do multi-state road trips, especially off-interstate to places like national parks? I do, and so do lots of other people judging by the visitation numbers.
Lassen, Zion, and Joshua Tree so far. The funny thing about all those places is that the campsites have 240v RV outlets that charges an EV (even a chevy bolt) just fine. KLA sites are the best, but any place with 120v outlets can still work.

The sooner you realize you're arguing from a point of ignorance, the easier it will be to have an actual discussion with you.

The rest of your points were all applied out-of-context, so there's no point in rehashing old arguments with them.

Lassen, Zion and Joshua Tree. Good. I note that all are reasonably accessible from QCs/SCs on nearby interstates. Of course, you had to stay at campgrounds with charging, or RV parks, neither of which I have any interest in doing. Let's see you charge your car at the trailheads I'm normally driving to and hiking/backpacking from, which lack electricity and usually any other facilities.
I don't know why you have an aversion to RV parks and campgrounds, especially since most of your visits involve some sort of overnight stay, but so be it. You have no problem spending extra time to bike or mass transit to your destination, but balk at the idea of overnighting just 30 miles or less outside your final destination (which still allows you to drive in for that morning hike and return the same day).

YOU are not ready for BEV's, but others don't have that same problem. As I've said, you're not an effective advocate for getting people off of fossil fuels.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

GRA
Posts: 11371
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:26 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:49 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:36 pm
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:50 pm


Lassen, Zion, and Joshua Tree so far. The funny thing about all those places is that the campsites have 240v RV outlets that charges an EV (even a chevy bolt) just fine. KLA sites are the best, but any place with 120v outlets can still work.

The sooner you realize you're arguing from a point of ignorance, the easier it will be to have an actual discussion with you.

The rest of your points were all applied out-of-context, so there's no point in rehashing old arguments with them.

Lassen, Zion and Joshua Tree. Good. I note that all are reasonably accessible from QCs/SCs on nearby interstates. Of course, you had to stay at campgrounds with charging, or RV parks, neither of which I have any interest in doing. Let's see you charge your car at the trailheads I'm normally driving to and hiking/backpacking from, which lack electricity and usually any other facilities.
I don't know why you have an aversion to RV parks and campgrounds, especially since most of your visits involve some sort of overnight stay, but so be it.

It's simple enough. Aside from not wanting to waste money or time paying to stay where all I'm going to do is sleep, when I can do so for free or less expensively elsewhere, and usually wanting to be on the trail as close to first light as possible so I want to be starting right there, I have no desire to hang out with people whose idea of camping is to bring the entire contents and behaviors of their homes with them. I've endured enough nights in such campgrounds, with people partying to 3 a.m. with stereos and TVs blaring, litter everywhere, and dogs barking and chasing the wildlife. No, thanks.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:49 pm
You have no problem spending extra time to bike or mass transit to your destination, but balk at the idea of overnighting just 30 miles or less outside your final destination (which still allows you to drive in for that morning hike and return the same day).

Quite so, because I ride my bike locally for the exercise (along with the fun and the elimination of GHGs) , which keeps me in shape for the trips. See above for the rest.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:49 pm
YOU are not ready for BEV's, but others don't have that same problem. As I've said, you're not an effective advocate for getting people off of fossil fuels.

You've got it bass-ackwards - I'm ready for BEVs, but BEVs and their infrastructure aren't ready for me, although they're finally getting close. Since many of my friends like to visit similar areas and do similar things, few of us are able to make the switch, even though we're all environmentalists who'd love to be able to wave good-bye to fossil-fuels. So, we make other choices to limit our energy/resource use in the meantime. One of my friends once wrote that he wanted to live a low-production, low-consumption, low-waste lifestyle very much under his own direction. I feel much the same. He's been a winter backcountry Ranger/hutmaster in Yosemite for 45 years now and is now in his mid-70s, skiing 9 miles each way to/from the trailhead to the hut, plus skiing or skating while there almost every day of the winter (Of course, there's no charging at the trailhead, although I've been trying to get some there for several years). In short, we're not members of the "shop for happiness" brigade.

Having gotten quite a few people to seriously reduce or eliminate their fossil-fuel use in their homes (see my sig), I suspect I'm a better advocate of same than you are, but that's not important. What is important is that people have to be willing to get off fossil-fuels, and you have to provide them with a non-fossil fuel option that is an improvement by their standards, not yours. As most of them are satisfied with the capabilities of their fossil-fueled ICEs and are unwilling to give those capabilities up, you have to provide them with a better option. Telling them they have to make more stops for longer in a limited number of places; choose where they can go and stay based on this or that on-line map/website and whether or not their car is compatible with this type of charger; monitor and calculate energy use and learn to make allowances for different conditions and degradation, are things that the average member of the general public can't be bothered to do. Their attitude is "Why should I - who needs the hassle"?
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:49 pm

GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:26 pm

You've got it bass-ackwards - I'm ready for BEVs, but BEVs and their infrastructure aren't ready for me, although they're finally getting close. Since many of my friends like to visit similar areas and do similar things, few of us are able to make the switch, even though we're all environmentalists who'd love to be able to wave good-bye to fossil-fuels. So, we make other choices to limit our energy/resource use in the meantime. One of my friends once wrote that he wanted to live a low-production, low-consumption, low-waste lifestyle very much under his own direction. I feel much the same. He's been a winter backcountry Ranger/hutmaster in Yosemite for 45 years now and is now in his mid-70s, skiing 9 miles each way to/from the trailhead to the hut, plus skiing or skating while there almost every day of the winter (Of course, there's no charging at the trailhead, although I've been trying to get some there for several years). In short, we're not members of the "shop for happiness" brigade.

Having gotten quite a few people to seriously reduce or eliminate their fossil-fuel use in their homes (see my sig), I suspect I'm a better advocate of same than you are, but that's not important. What is important is that people have to be willing to get off fossil-fuels, and you have to provide them with a non-fossil fuel option that is an improvement by their standards, not yours. As most of them are satisfied with the capabilities of their fossil-fueled ICEs and are unwilling to give those capabilities up, you have to provide them with a better option. Telling them they have to make more stops for longer in a limited number of places; choose where they can go and stay based on this or that on-line map/website and whether or not their car is compatible with this type of charger; monitor and calculate energy use and learn to make allowances for different conditions and degradation, are things that the average member of the general public can't be bothered to do. Their attitude is "Why should I - who needs the hassle"?
That right there is the problem! Just like your life has been a series of trade-offs, so are theirs. But neither of you have understood what trade-offs you've made in order to continue using fossil-fuels, because you believe BEV's drawbacks outweigh their benefits. You think that minimizing gasoline consumption (as opposed to eliminating it) legitimizes your view that BEV's aren't good enough yet to replace your current vehicle. And you impress upon your friends that very viewpoint despite the possibility that they very well benefit more from a BEV despite the drawbacks that you constantly harp about. Copper shots indeed.

For every 4 people I talk to about switching to BEV's (because their lifestyle would actually benefit from it), only 1 are actually convinced enough to make the change. And 100% of the time, they're always sorry for NOT having done so sooner! Because people like you fill them with doubts about what kind of life changes they'd have to make to accommodate living with a BEV.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”