Range Anxiety” and the Realities of Electric Vehicle Dependability

Battery problems, charging times, and power outages during emergencies are all factors that are not noted in glossy green-energy dialog.

Perhaps there will be a day when civilization will not need fossil fuels as a ready source of energy.

However, today is not that day.

The Ika Rere, a brand new vessel and the first electric powered ferry in the southern hemisphere just had to be rescued after running out of battery in the harbor, leaving the vessel stranded without any power!

Luckily help was on the way, with a fossil fuel powered police boat coming to rescue the stranded passengers.

After successfully rescuing the passengers, the police boat went back out to tug the electric ferry back to port.

In fact, the realities of energy infrastructure are beginning to creep into green energy dreams. In fact, there is a fun term to describe the concern: Range anxiety.

Electric vehicle sales are accelerating, with a big push by California to stop selling new gas cars by 2035. But not all drivers are sold.

“My own concern is the range,” Novia Wong said. “Where do I find a charger? How far can I really go?”

These are questions that dealership owner John Patterson gets from every customer.

“One of the big words that we hear is, ‘range anxiety,’” he said.

How long does it take to fill up your gas tank (assuming you can afford to do so)? It takes me about 15 minutes to fill up my Honda CRV.

Charging times for electric vehicles appear to be a little longer.

You can also find approximate recharge times on some of the EV manufacturers’ web sites. Mini, for instance lists recharge times for its upcoming Mini Cooper Electric several different ways. It claims a 36-minute recharge to 80 percent at a Level 3 DC fast-charging station with up to 50 kW; 20 percent per hour at a home or public Level 2 charging station with up to 7.4 kW; and also 15–25 miles of range per hour at a Level 2 station. But nowhere does it state from what SoC the battery is at when charging begins.

And the inability to fuel up rapidly can lead to serious consequences, especially in an emergency situation like an impending hurricane.

But two years ago, the Florida Department of Agriculture issued a report sounding an alarm about what widespread implementation could mean for a mass evacuation scenario, along the lines of what Florida has seen this week with Hurricane Ian.

Since major hurricanes are often coupled with widespread power outages, the situation could leave electric vehicle drivers “stranded without transportation for days,” the report found.

The report called on the Florida Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles to rapidly build up a network of rapid charging stations, along with investing in portable charging stations that can be charged and deployed along major routes to avoid a disaster on top of a disaster.

“One major issue comes from crowding — long queues. I’d expect it to form in gasoline stations and also charging stations,” said University of Illinois researcher Eleftharia Kontou, who co-authored a new study about the issue in South Florida. “What happens with electric vehicles is that charging is more time consuming. So having fast charging infrastructure is very important so that people can quickly charge and go to a shelter during the migrations.”

The lack of rapid charging stations can lead to people fleeing a disaster to take longer and indirect routes to get to storm shelters. That can put them more directly in harm’s way, said Kontou.

Battery problems, charging times, and power outages are all factors that are not noted in the glossy green-energy dialogue.



Suburban Farm Guy | October 5, 2022 at 7:15 am

What tangled webs we weave
When first we practice to crash free market economies with fraudulent Marxist Green Energy misdirection schemes.

Watermelon, anyone?

While eating watermelon, I came up with a solution—design the electric cars to run on rails and mount a pantograph on the roof to contact the hot wire.

If you tried to go where it was not supported you would be off the rails like Joe Biden.


taurus the judge | October 5, 2022 at 7:18 am

This is but one scenario. There are others.

Many of us have been trying to tell this for years.

Green energy ( as defined by the left as a 1:1 replacement for everything else) is IMPOSSIBLE by the laws of physics ( no work around)

It is a wealth redistribution scam and will never be anything else.


MattMusson in reply to taurus the judge. | October 5, 2022 at 7:59 am

75% of the lithium batteries coming from China are being made in Concentration Camps by Uighur Muslims. The Cobalt used in these batteries is being dug by Child Slave Miners in Africa.

Now, to expand the production of EVs by an order of magnitude, requires 10 times more Concentration Camps and 10 times more Child Slave Miners.


henrybowman in reply to MattMusson. | October 5, 2022 at 8:52 am

Democrats: “So?”

Subotai Bahadur in reply to henrybowman. | October 5, 2022 at 9:30 pm

Slight amendment. “So? They are all Wreckers, Hoarders, Kulaks, and Enemies of the State . . . and their children.” That is for when they have total control here.

Subotai Bahadur

Peabody in reply to MattMusson. | October 5, 2022 at 9:06 am

Products from China are already unreliable, but if you place a very high quota, you will get very high unreliability.

RandomCrank in reply to MattMusson. | October 5, 2022 at 6:58 pm

The cells for EV batteries come from Japan and South Korea, and U.S. car makers are starting to open battery plants here.

Where do the raw materials come from? How many child slaves are involved in the mining?


RandomCrank in reply to Paul. | October 5, 2022 at 7:57 pm

I’d have to look again, but I believe the big lithium producers are Chile and Australia. By the way, do you somehow think that gassers don’t have rare materials, like the platinum in the catalytic converters?


Ironclaw in reply to Paul. | October 5, 2022 at 11:18 pm

No offense intended, but most of the rare-earths are not actually that rare. They simply require a laborious and hazardous extraction process from the ores that bear them.

As for the platinum-group metals, most of them are sourced from South Africa. An odd geological formation called the Bushveld complex. Most of the rest come from Russia.

Is this where you claim fast charging doesn’t exist again. Why pray, is it impossible to replace fossil fuels with green energy .. this should be entertaining

Ironclaw in reply to Fatkins. | October 5, 2022 at 11:20 pm

Nowhere near fast enough. It’s a sad state of affairs when you can spend well into the six-figure range for an EV that is less capable and has less utility than an internal combustion car you can buy for roughly $20k.

Barry in reply to Fatkins. | October 6, 2022 at 1:52 am

Hey fatty, why don’t you study a bit?

But please do get an electric vehicle so the rest of us can point and laugh at you stopped on the side of the road miles from any charging station that works.

taurus the judge in reply to Fatkins. | October 6, 2022 at 11:53 am

You put a lot of WEIGHT into that thought, Beulah

JohnSmith100 in reply to taurus the judge. | October 5, 2022 at 4:51 pm

I agree, in that mobile use is far less practical than stationary. There are people who live in mountians who can have 24×7 hydro in the range of 1-2 KW, for them that is practical. A fairly small battery say 1o KW will handle surges.

With solar, 30-40 KWh battery will handle most homes.

Some people are using their alternative energy to charge electric cars, of course, range is a big problem.

Eventually, there will be lighter and higher energy batteries, until that happens, I would not consider any electric vehicle.


Maybe, maybe not. But not very soon for certain.

IIRC level 3 charging if you want to do so at home is roughly going to cost you $35,000 to install the equipment in your garage.
If you have a garage.
And let us not forget, electricity may be cheap now, what will it cost in the future? Probably much more than what we’re paying now.

RandomCrank in reply to 4fun. | October 5, 2022 at 9:40 pm

A Level 3 charger in a house is plain stupid. EVs are a subject near ‘n dear to me so I’m tempted to go into Full Nerd, but I’ll only say this much: For about $250, you get a charging cord that plugs into the same outlet as an electric clothes dryer. If you want more detail than that, just ask.

A plain Tesla model S has a 90Kw battery. Most electric dryers are around 30 amps at 240 volts. 30 x 240 = 7.2kw. 90/7.2 = 12.5 hours to charge your vehicle from a discharged state.

50 miles /day is roughly 13.5Kw drain, 13.5 / 7.2 = <2 hours to recharge

The problem is you can’t travel very far from home. It’s a really big hassle to go on any trip that can’t be done on a single charge.

So, electric vehicles are like a small convertible car, toys for the wealthy. Nothing more. And if everybody had one, no one would go anywhere, the real goal of the left.


RandomCrank in reply to Barry. | October 6, 2022 at 1:17 pm

The average light passenger vehicle is driven 32 miles/day. EVs less than that: more like 25 miles a day. The typical EV gets 3.5 miles/kWh, so it needs 7-1/7 kWh/day.

At 240v/30A, you’ll add about 5 kW/hour, because there’s a 20% overhead factor. Thus, the typical EV uses about an hour and a half a day of Level 2 charging. Obviously, this varies.

Like everything else they touch, in their rush to control all, they overdo it, leaving consumers, real Americans, stuck holding the bag because of their harebrained schemes and panics.

See climate, pandemic, economics, border control, nonexistent regulation of crime, defunding police etc., etc.

The only trait in which EV’s surpass gas-powered vehicles is with regard to faster acceleration. By every other metric that actually matters to working-class drivers (as opposed to coastal, wealthy, virtue-signaling Dumb-o-crat elites) — range, refueling speed/convience and safety (with EV batteries representing a fire hazard in a crash), EV’s lag gas-powered vehicles, representing a regression in terms of consumer benefits and value. And, this doesn’t even begin to address the manifestly phony claims to alleged “green” credentials and undeserved cachet, what with the obscene amount of rare earth minerals (largely sourced from China) that are required to produce EV batteries, as well as the batteries’ short lifespans and their inability to be recycled.

Evacuations for hurricanes is not that big a deal as the range of the vehicles are not diminished all that much from stop and go traffic. Had a work colleague who evacuated Houston for one of the bad storms with a Hybrid. Gas vehicles were running out of gas due to the constant use during the very long back-ups, He had no issues as the car went to little energy use during the stops. He was even able to run his AC.

Electric vehicles are a huge issue if you do not have to evacuate or do so to a place without power or chargers. A week or two without electricity means a long time with no transport. In a big storm a week or two without power is not uncommon.

chrisboltssr in reply to Fredlike. | October 5, 2022 at 9:21 am

Keyword for your friend is “hybrid”. That means the gas range is Wendy he still relied upon.

CommoChief in reply to Fredlike. | October 5, 2022 at 9:21 am

Your premise is that range and recharge won’t be much of an issue. What happens when 24 hours out from landfall the EV owners all plug in simultaneously?

What happens when, as now, they can’t go back home and have made it to safety but in an area without sufficient EV charging stations? These and other factors always seem to be ignored or wished away. When addressed the preferred solution set from EV proponents is for the govt to pay for a build out of the infrastructure to support the EV. Eff that.

EV have a place today for the urban driver who travels short distances. They have a place as a second vehicle for some situations. They are not ready for prime time as a 1:1 replacement for ICE passenger vehicles.

The EV has many drawbacks. Range is one. Battery disposal/replacement is another. In five or ten years as the early adopters EV batteries need disposal we will see the problem. IMO, the manufacturer should be responsible for disposal of the battery in order to present an upfront cost accounting at purchase for the issue. Same with EV charging stations. Have them standardize a charging station, fund a network of fast charging stations nation wide sufficient to support the vehicles with consumers of EV paying via subscription.

The polite expression is ‘range anxiety’. It is more accurate to say lack of reliability due to inability of manufacturers to build out the infrastructure to support them. Couple that with looming wave of battery disposal deal with and the lack of reasonable cost replacement batteries.

jrcowboy49 in reply to CommoChief. | October 5, 2022 at 2:36 pm

It is not cost effective to spend billions on enough charging stations for EC vehicle owners which represent 20% or less of the drivers. Government needs to get the hell out of market regulation, CAFE standards, and people’s life. The internal combustion engines (ICE) are fine with me including diesels, Trucks are Americas lifeline. If you miss the clutch in the ICE, you will really miss the gears in the EV the government is trying to force down your throat. An electric motor has just one speed – and you don’t need to shift it. Not much to do in one except push the accelerator down – and keep an eye on the rapidly decreasing range. This will give you time to think about where you’ll spend the next several hours waiting to recharge. In the ICE, you can think about which road you’ll abuse next – as you wait 5 minutes to refill the tank. Winter also effects the battery output in a negative way, less range.

CommoChief in reply to jrcowboy49. | October 5, 2022 at 9:22 pm

Of course it isn’t cost effective to build out the infrastructure, that’s why the EV evangelists want the govt to do it. Just as they want govt subsidies for grid scale wind and solar while rejecting calls for the power they contract to deliver to have reliability standards.

Battery disposal is going to be a growing problem. They can’t be dumped in a local landfill. Lots of hazardous materials in these batteries. Will the communities and States leading the parade for the use of EV be willing to house the batteries upon disposal? No way that these folks agree to that. They will ship them to rural areas out of sight and mind.

Without … substantial … government subsidies … EV’s will not get off the ground on the schedule leadership is pushing for … both EV’s and charging infrastructure will need to be subsidized. But … we ain’t got the money … so that means you get shafted and we create another unresolvable mess and drag on the country.

taurus the judge in reply to Fredlike. | October 5, 2022 at 9:34 am

That’s a very overly simplistic and totally incorrect view on that scenario.

Forget the initial range of a fully loaded EV stuck in traffic evacuating a given location ( but use that as a starting point)

Along every route ( suppose the govt designates secondary roads as an alternative)

you will have to have the high end fast chargers AND the POWER or you will have a rolling jam

or generators ( need even more fuel)

Too bad you cant take a 5 gallon can of amps with you

Fat_Freddys_Cat in reply to Fredlike. | October 5, 2022 at 10:34 am

Isn’t there also a problem if you’re stuck in traffic in the middle of a winter storm? I think we had that happen last winter (or winter before? can’t recall) on the I-95 corridor. Drivers of EVs couldn’t run their heaters for long enough and IIRC had to resort to begging owners of gas-powered vehicles to let them in to warm up.

EV batteries lose 40% of their range/power in weather below 40 degrees F.
EV’s are cute for local driving around, but you better have a backup reliable vehicle.


RandomCrank in reply to 1073. | October 5, 2022 at 6:52 pm

That’s not true about below 40 degrees. I have 10 years of records, kept in a spreadsheet, and have lived in climates with typical temps from 15 degrees to 100 degrees. EV fuel economy doesn’t get killed that badly until you get below about 10 degrees or so. From, say, 20 degrees to 40 degrees, the differential is about 20%.

All of this is manageable until you get into the really cold places, like Minneapolis as an example. Bigger fuel economy issues are elevation, towing or hauling, and high speeds. The latter one looks like it’ll be addressed by 2-speed transmissions, which will improve high-speed fuel economy by quite a bit, maybe 10%-15%.

The downside to introducing an overdrive gear will be the introduction of transmissions and their gears, which will add at least some maintenance costs,


DaveGinOly in reply to RandomCrank. | October 6, 2022 at 11:21 am

Still, loss of efficiency due to local air temperature effectively increases the cost of operation per mile. What effect does temperature have on the efficiency of an internal combustion engine? Close to zero, I’d wager.
Another negative for electric vehicles.


RandomCrank in reply to RandomCrank. | October 6, 2022 at 1:20 pm

EVs are indeed more susceptible to reduced cold-weather fuel economy. That said, it’s not a cost issue given how much cheaper electricity is than gas or diesel, when used for transportation.

Yes FFCat, thank you for bringing that up! Last Christmas the Sierras were hit with a series of heavy winter storms that closed all major roads through the mountains save one – highway 50. Highway 50 winds through the Tahoe Basin. The traffic jams were enormous (12 hours to get 30 miles from Carson City to South Lake Tahoe) in part caused by electric vehicles whose batteries drained power too quickly in the cold.

EV’s ability to run in winter temps became quite the topic of derision here in Northern Nevada. As in, who in their right mind drives a Prius to Tahoe this time of year? Half-joking suggestions that they get seasonally banned were floated. It’s a real issue. On narrow mountain roads with 4’ banks of snow and temps in the single digits it becomes a life and death issue for more than just the EV drivers.

RandomCrank in reply to B Buchanan. | October 5, 2022 at 7:00 pm

I love Northern Nevada like crazy. It’s the wrong place for an EV.

Horse crap. If you rely upon an electric vehicle for evacuation from any disaster you might as well dig your grave.


UnCivilServant | October 5, 2022 at 8:27 am

If we do not assume the people writing the policies are as stupid as we give them credit for, the other rational explaination is that the goal is not the replacement of the current Internal Combustion fleet with electrics, but a purge of individually owned automobiles to eliminate the mobility of the general population.

So, stupid, evil, or both?


Evil Otto in reply to UnCivilServant. | October 5, 2022 at 8:41 am


I’ve been saying this for a while, because people on the conservatives side tend to think of the libs making these authoritarian rules as 3D chess-playing Machiavellian schemers. They’re not. They’re Ayn Rand villains, incompetent and malicious at the same time. They WANT to be the Illuminati, moving people around like game pieces and controlling society, but in reality they’re gullible fools who destroy but have no idea how to actually make people comply. They’re not that hard to defeat, but we need to out the effort in… and that’s where we’ve been failing.

BierceAmbrose in reply to Evil Otto. | October 5, 2022 at 4:54 pm

“They’re not. They’re Ayn Rand villains, incompetent and malicious at the same time.”

So, I’m not the only one seeing that. Every time they tout some national “deal” I cringe.

Colonel Travis in reply to UnCivilServant. | October 5, 2022 at 9:03 am

They are not stupid enough to not know what the consequences of their policies will be. It’s all about control. Control what you drive and when you drive. And if there isn’t enough power for you and everyone else to drive, even better. You can just sit there in your urban hive with everyone else. When they feel like locking you down China style, you can’t escape.

nordic prince in reply to Colonel Travis. | October 5, 2022 at 9:32 pm


To them, failure isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Failure of current laws and regulations provides the impetus for another round of same. Gun control is a perfect example of how this dynamic works.

Fat_Freddys_Cat in reply to UnCivilServant. | October 5, 2022 at 10:35 am

I’ve long thought that the long term goal is to eliminate the mobility of the general population. The Left has never liked individuals owning automobiles, going back decades.

Bingo. Cars are freedom, something the left hates.

I call them “coal powered vehicles” because the majority of electricity generations is fueled by coal.

Ironclaw in reply to datapath. | October 5, 2022 at 3:54 pm

That’s funny, because I refer to my gas-powered car as a “solar-powered vehicle” since hydrocarbon-based fuels of all types are literally solar energy stored in chemical form.

JohnSmith100 in reply to Ironclaw. | October 5, 2022 at 5:10 pm

Hydrocarbons are a very efficient and and pretty high density.

What size battery would one need to power a 6 ton freezer unit for 8-10 hours? (up to 75KWH) The inverter would need to be able to provide 208-240v 3 phase power as well. I bet it will weigh allot too.
I bring this up because that is what you would need to power a 53ft freezer trailer just for one day delivering food to businesses without a diesel powered reefer unit. Also the battery would increase the tare of the trailer and reduce the cargo capacity, and this does not include the truck and what it would take to power it electrically.
Until the energy density issues is solved electric anything should remain a niche’ segment of automobiles and anyone trying to force this on everyone is an enemy of civilized society.

taurus the judge in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 10:46 am

@Mt Fugi

Gonna use your post as an example because there are “hidden” things in a battery calculation the “green” don’t want fully understood by the masses.

Lets say that 75kWH is correct for a 12 hr run for discussion sake.

You will need THREE batteries at 150kWH to run the business per week ( bare minimum)

The 75 for the “load” is a constant use based on peak

A “battery” to give a 75 load must have almost DOUBLE that because as the battery depletes things happen so its best to estimate power requirements at 50% of a battery capacity due to density discharge, heat and refreshment and all that. ( recommend a 150kWH battery)

Then that battery has to charge/normalize for many hours so it will have to be rotated the next day ( assuming the same duty cycle)- That means another battery to use while this one is charging/conditioning.

A reefer cant afford to go hot so you will have a back up for emergencies ( and a crane)

Lots of hidden costs and this is a non linear load calculation.

Now people can start to grasp how diesel fuel has a much better energy density than any battery has right now.
The “green” agenda is a direct threat to millions of lives and we must resist it at all costs to ensure continued lively hood and standard of living.

RandomCrank in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 6:56 pm

Gasoline’s energy density is 100x that of a lithium battery, and diesel about 125%. This has definite implications for range, especially as EVs take on more form factors. I don’t see any battery chemistry breakthroughs that will change it.

murkyv in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 8:42 pm

The exhaust from a tier 4 or 5 diesel is cleaner that the air it takes in

Diesel over electric has worked well for many years in mining equipment. No reason diesel over electric couldn’t be a sensible alternative in passenger cars.


Ironclaw in reply to murkyv. | October 5, 2022 at 11:27 pm

Diesel over electric works ok for stuff like train because they’re freaking huge. I don’t know if you could scale that down to something that works well for a passenger car, though they do make a few diesel hybrids.

JohnSmith100 in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 6:00 pm

That would take 1000 lbs of LiFePo4 batteries, packaging them would be at least 700 more lbs, 18 KW three phase inverter would be at least 300 more lbs and cost at least $20,000. Vibration would be a huge problem and reliability poor. It is hard to beat a Yanmar or Kobata diesel which will run about 15,000- 20,000 hours between overhauls,

Not to mention that most of those diesels are of the inline variety which actually allows a top-end rebuild without pulling the engine.

RandomCrank in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 7:02 pm

Urban light passenger vehicles is a very big “niche.” For the large majority of urban dwellers, EVs make sense. For semitrucks, they make no sense on account of the energy density issue. But it’s just stupid to use the latter to discredit the former.

JohnSmith100 in reply to RandomCrank. | October 5, 2022 at 7:45 pm

Sort of true for urban, but there is still the problem of them being unreliable when there is a disaster. The exception being the Toyota, which is gas electric hybrid. Still, the price of them are unreasonable. $20,000 for ten year old vehicle. And some of the are NiCd batteries, which are low energy density, i.e., shirt range.

RandomCrank in reply to JohnSmith100. | October 5, 2022 at 7:55 pm

I see no evidence that EVs are any less reliable than gassers in a disaster. In fact, if a car is submerged in water, I’d probably rather it be an EV as long as the big battery casing remains intact. As for hybrids, I pretty much agree. I am baffled by GM’s cancellation of the Volt, and particularly of the Voltec architecture.


Ironclaw in reply to RandomCrank. | October 5, 2022 at 11:41 pm

In the case of a submersion, as long as you don’t get water in the intake while the engine is running, your main problem is going to be with the wiring harnesses and control modules. Same with an EV which also has wiring harnesses and control modules.

As for the Volt, they also did a pretty good job doubling as fireworks. It’s pretty pathetic when the manufacturer has to suggest that you not charge the vehicle within 50 feet of a structure.


taurus the judge in reply to RandomCrank. | October 6, 2022 at 11:58 am

What evidence have you looked at for this “assessment” about reliability of EV’s during a disaster?

Is it the same “evidence” Barr looked at regarding election theft?

EV might make sense in an urban area, but then why do you need an EV at all if the urban area is well designed for foot/bicycle/public transportation? Then where do you park your EV? Then is there a charger you can install? If you are renting good luck getting a dedicated 50amp circuit for the charger. Hope it’s an parking spot that is secure or someone will dork with your car while it’s charging while you sleep. The pros/cons right now for that environment is not good.
Or you could move to Tokyo. No needing a car there.

Ironclaw in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 11:42 pm

Don’t forget those charging cables are copper and people love stealing copper.

Really? Lots of urban dwellers live in apartments, and lots of those apartments are stacked vertically. Depending on the age of the apartment complex, they may not even have chargers or they might be located in somewhat inconvenient locations. Not to mention they probably won’t have enough that you can simply plug in and leave it all night. Also, just because you live in the city doesn’t mean you never take longer trips and EV’s flat-out suck for road-tripping.

PODKen in reply to Mt. Fuji. | October 5, 2022 at 9:41 pm

I saw a test of an EV pickup towing a load of about a ton. The pickups range was reduced by about 2/3.

RandomCrank in reply to PODKen. | October 5, 2022 at 10:04 pm

Totally agree. It gets worse. Try that uphill in winter and see how far you get.

There is no perfect solution to any man-made problem. In fact, we don’t have the ability to permanently solve problems. Any “solution” we come up with will only lead to more problems. The dilemma we have is whether our solution will lead to smaller or bigger problems in the future. With EVs we are beginning to see that this solution will only lead to even bigger problems.

But I don’t expect any Leftist to understand this because that requires wisdom and they’re too smart for that

EV? Nope, not un till the technology is there to support it. We are at 1/4th of where we need to be with energy storage.

I have a buddy in Sarasota FL that is powering his house with 3 inverters that he is slaving off of his Dodge 3/4 ton diesel that has two alternators. The running of the engine at 1000 rpm used less than 15 gallons for 48 hours of power. It is keeping the refrigerator and freezer running or keeping a window unit AC going to keep a room cool for his kids to sleep. Funny thing is he lost power but still has high speed AT&T fiber internet.

taurus the judge in reply to Tsquared79. | October 5, 2022 at 10:04 am

Think about it

Assuming $4 a gallon and a 30 day month

That’s about $900 a month in fuel ( not counting other maintenance and implementation cost)

“Green Energy” is socialism. It “pretends” to show a benefit until it runs out of OPM.

Our politicians are addicted to OPM.
Other People’s Money.

I think the point is that the guy can actually DO what he’s doing and no amount of battery storage that’s considered even remotely affordable is capable of accomplishing that.

JohnSmith100 in reply to Tsquared79. | October 5, 2022 at 6:21 pm

Idling that truck engine is horribly inefficient. Best solution would be a small diesel, next best a small Honda motor, 2HP per 1000 watts. LP is the most reliable but a a pain in a disaster situation, gasoline is the least desirable in terms of reliability but best for scrounging up in a disaster.

There would be far less fuel consumption if one has an inverter and suitable battery bank which stores all the available power until the battery is full, and then stops and starts the generator as needed.

Diesel generators are $$$$$

It may be the most efficient thing around, but it’s POSSIBLE which no green solution can say.

evs are a pipe dream–as stated earlier, a “niche” market–without a practical and cost-effective infrastructure to support them, they remain an alternate means of transport only

range but especially reliability and endurance are huge issues to be resolved–to say evs will supplant internal-combustion vehicles is one hell of a stretch, particularly for emergency response / military applications

until science / engineering comes up with a solution beyond our (apparent) imagination and ability, evs will remain an alternate means of transport, not the primary means for our mobility

idiots like newsom are living in an alternate reality–like the anti-drug ads of yore,
“just say no”

RandomCrank in reply to texansamurai. | October 5, 2022 at 7:05 pm

I have seen no evidence that EVs are less reliable. Tesla problems have mainly been non-EV related, i.e. poor build quality in mechanical components having nothing to do with the batteries or motors. By the way, I wouldn’t buy a Tesla because I don’t trust the company on those mechanical issues, or their ability to service them.

It’s not so much the EV itself … it’s everything else to do with them that makes EV’s a bad idea at the moment.

RandomCrank in reply to PODKen. | October 5, 2022 at 10:02 pm

Look, I am a facts guy. Last of the Mohicans. A decade ago, it was EVangelists and they were fools. Now I see the “EVs = Satan” crowd, and they’re just as stupid. Kids, it’s engineering. Someone ought to shitcan the politics for a microsecond and look at these things as gadgets.

So Tesla makes fun gadgets but too many of them break. Not because of the EV side of things, but because of mundane crap like suspensions, windows, yadda yadda yadda. It’s why, for years, my line has been “Wait for the next generation, and then buy one from a car company and not the founder of PayPal.”

The funny part is that Tesla actually offers the best infrastructure you’re going to find, and a lot of that is actually funded by a percentage of the vehicle sales. Also, they’re not the only ones that seem to have a problem getting around mechanical issues like suspension systems and CV axles. 2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E (not a real mustang, they are sinfully ugly) have a recall out about premature wear and failure on their rear CV axles. I wonder, did the eggheads there try to reuse the ones from the real mustangs and not compensate for the more-than-doubling of the weight of the car?

I like my energy like my sex. It should be dirty and cheap.

MattMusson in reply to E Howard Hunt. | October 5, 2022 at 10:58 am

Energy is WEALTH.

Make enough energy cheaply enough and you lift people right out of Poverty. Restrict supply and push up the price, you push working people down into Poverty.

DaveGinOly in reply to MattMusson. | October 6, 2022 at 11:38 am

Truly. Liberals are at war with the inexpensive, reliable energy provided by fossil fuels. That makes them a threat to the standards of living (such as they are), health, and life expectancy of every person on the globe. They are encouraging the return of wide-spread poverty, that has only very recently been largely eradicated by the growth of wealth due to the availability of said energy.

I needed a rental car for a week and they offered a Tesla at a low price so I decided to try it. It was a mistake. First the rental company didn’t charge it ahead of lime and there was something wrong with the battery. When I changed it the next day I had to hunt for a working charging station. When I found one it cost me $10 for 120 miles range ! I returned the Tesla without any miles left on it and got a Toyota Tundra which was much better.

“How long does it take to fill up your gas tank (assuming you can afford to do so)? It takes me about 15 minutes to fill up my Honda CRV.”

What…15 mins? It takes me barely 5 minutes to put 28 gallons in my Tundra, pay and drive off.

Ironclaw in reply to gwsjr425. | October 5, 2022 at 11:15 am

It sounds like you need a canister vent valve or an evap purge solenoid if you have to fill that slowly.

taurus the judge | October 5, 2022 at 11:08 am

Here’s another scenario the “greenies” don’t like to talk about. ( hard to find info on it for a good reason)

Its called “recovery”- think discharged vehicle, dead battery or stuck in the mud in a field.

“Remote charging and/or battery change may not be realistic or even possible in many situations”

There will have to be a long high amp cable between the mother and child vehicle to move it.

Just for awareness

This presents numerous issues in coordinated movement, length, weight, safety and drain on the other vehicle.

I don’t personally care how bad EV’s are or how many people want to waste that money on useless garbage. What bothers me is that they want to force me to waste my time and money with their worthless garbage.

I’ve always heard a comparison between the horse and buggy and the automobile used, except that nobody tried to force those people to give up their horses in favor of cars. That was a decision people made because it made the most sense for them, not because they were forbidden to keep their horses.

RandomCrank in reply to Ironclaw. | October 5, 2022 at 7:14 pm

Elsewhere, I’ve noted that I own a Toyota Rav-4 gasser, a one-ton diesel pickup, and an EV. The Toyota costs about 18 cents a mile for the fuel. The diesel truck costs about 35 cents a mile. The EV costs 3 cents a mile.

I don’t use the EV for short hops to display my virtue. I use it because it’s much cheaper to drive. As for virtue, mine might be the only EV with an NRA Life Member decal on the hatchback window. I laugh at the “save the world” horseshit. It’s a car, not a cause.

I want to get the 2023 Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV to have the best of both worlds as my drive to school is right in the sweet spot, and the 50amp charger circuit can double for a welder too.

DaveGinOly in reply to Ironclaw. | October 6, 2022 at 11:46 am

Which leads to the question: Why now? Can’t it wait? Over time, the cost of fossil fuels will increase as oil become scarcer. During that same time, electric vehicle technology will improve and its cost will fall. At some point, they will switch places, and electric tech will become less expensive than fossil fuels and will eventually completely force fossil fuels out of the market.
The avowed answer to the question of “Why now?” is “To save the planet – it can’t wait.” We know that’s BS. Somebodies alive now are positioned to make a ton of money. They don’t care about the planet, and they certainly don’t care about how practical or efficient their “solution” to a non-existent problem might be. They don’t care about the human cost. They’re just chasing the money.

One of my many problems with sparky cars and green ideas is; who pays for the infrastructure? Tax money didn’t pay for gas stations.

No incentives, no subsidies, NADA. If EV cars can’t compete, let them rot in parking lots. I’ll never own one.

PODKen in reply to MAJack. | October 5, 2022 at 9:52 pm

Some of us will be forced to buy them just the same … and I’m tired of taking “one for the Gipper”.

Ironclaw in reply to PODKen. | October 5, 2022 at 11:51 pm

So all the rest of us, from whom they will pry the keys to my real car from my cold dead hands, should have to?

There has been no comment on the, widely publicized at the time, last February, fires that sunk an ocean freighter loaded with $400 million of high end VW cars, because of EV battery fires that could not be put out. One of them in your garage could burn down your house. Until I read that whatever caused those problems has been solved, I would not have one. Absent that, I assume the issue is just being concealed.

A minor side point …. the acceleration of these cars is stunning. I was in one once and concluded that Senior citizens, with poorer motor control because of aging, might be at risk of running into cars in front of them.

Paul in reply to jb4. | October 5, 2022 at 2:26 pm

Yes, lithium ion batteries are notorious fire hazards if not handled properly… and sometimes even if they are handled properly.

The ValuJet Airlines Flight 592 crash into the Florida Everglades was caused by lithium ion batteries in the cargo hold spontaneously catching fire.

CanonF1 in reply to Paul. | October 5, 2022 at 3:25 pm

Actually the Valujet crash was caused by oxyen generators, for the drop down masks in the cabin. Those generators use a chemical reaction to generate the oxygen, and that reaction causes the generator to get extremely hot. Valujet did not transport them securely and one if not more of the generators were activated by shifting cargo in the cargo hold. I believe there were aircraft wheel assemblies in the cargo bin, with greased bearings that caught fire and the tremendous amount of smoke resulted in the crew unable to control the aircraft because they simply couldn’t see. I don’t recall structural or control cable damage as a contributing factor, but it could have been.

CanonF1 in reply to CanonF1. | October 5, 2022 at 3:32 pm

For clarification, the oxygen generators that caused the fire were spare parts, along with the wheel assemblies. They were not installed on the aircraft as part of the emergency oxygen system.

Thanks. I was living in Atlanta at the time and that was obviously a huge event. Somehow I got it locked into my memory that it was caused by batteries… funny how memory “works” sometimes (or not).


DaveGinOly in reply to Paul. | October 6, 2022 at 11:48 am

Boeing had battery fire problems on one of its newer aircraft. They didn’t bring one down. Just lucky.

Ironclaw in reply to jb4. | October 5, 2022 at 11:53 pm

It may be the same problem as the Samsung Note. Batteries need some head space, they expand and contract. Maybe the eggheads forgot that little detail and didn’t leave room for such things.

It is very difficult to visualize more than a small percentage of the driving public willingly giving up the convenience of being able to fully refuel their vehicle in about 5 minutes in exchange for an electric car that takes 30-45 minutes to partially recharge not counting the time waiting in line for your turn. And which requires recharging more often than a gas-engine car needs to be refueled – because it can only be partially recharged at these fast chargers which multiplies the inconvenience. An electric car’s battery pack isn’t just an empty container into which electricity can be pumped. When you plug in, electricity is metered into the battery’s cells, where chemical reactions take place that cannot be rushed without risking permanent and expensive damage to the battery pack. This is why it takes 30-45 minutes or longer to fast charge an electric car, and it’s also why electric car batteries can’t be fully recharged at fast chargers. An electric motor has just one speed – and you don’t need to shift it. Not much to do in one except push the accelerator down – and keep an eye on the rapidly decreasing range. This will give you time to think about where you’ll spend the next several hours waiting to recharge. In the ICE, you can think about which road you’ll abuse next – as you wait 5 minutes to refill the tank. Winter also effects the battery output in a negative way, less range.

RandomCrank in reply to jrcowboy49. | October 5, 2022 at 6:44 pm

Yes and no. Two things to say in the other direction.

1. The average car is driven 32 miles a day. Less for EVs because they’re rarely used for road trips. Thus, recharging isn’t as much of an issue for the typical urban commuter as it’s made out to be.

2. 90%+ of recharging is done at home, overnight. There are certainly issues, led by apartment dwellers. But multifamily housing is 15% of this country’s units. Yes, there will be plenty of exceptions and slow charging WILL be an issue, but not a show stopper if EVs are adopted widely in cities, especially as second cars.

No … it WILL be a show stopper … due to the lack of sufficient charging infrastructure to meet the demand.

DaveGinOly in reply to RandomCrank. | October 6, 2022 at 11:58 am

So, everyone in a large metro area comes home at night, and millions of EVs are plugged into an already struggling/in adequate electrical grid for recharging on a hot/cold night. Sounds peachy.

You must plug your car, and everything else, into the electric grid we control, that’s incidentally becoming less reliable.

It’s like you being able to go places has no value at all.

I have owned 16 vehicles, and now own 3: a one-ton diesel pickup, a Toyota Rav-4 gasser, and a funky little EV (Think City — look it up) that I bought out of curiosity at a 70% discount when Think went bust a decade ago. I used the EV to learn about them, and about electricity generation.

This is a subject that I know a whole lot about. My take satisfies no one other than those inclined toward facts.

1. Range is indeed the biggie, but oddly enough that’s getting better with the latest EVs. The car makers play games on that. Without (for now) going into excruciating detail, it’s fair to say that the practical range of EVs is about 225 miles in good weather and 100-150 miles in really cold weather. This makes EVs viable as urban commuter vehicles, given that the average EV is driven 25-30 miles a day.

2. Battery recycling will happen. 99% of lead-acid batteries are recycled, and anyone who bothers to do some research will see that lithium batteries will be recycled. It hasn’t happened much yet because EVs are still new and there just aren’t many spent batteries yet. That will change, and they’ll get recycled.

3. Charging is another big issue. That one is also susceptible to MEGO (“my eyes glaze over”) syndrome, but the reality is that charge times are much longer than gassing up a conventional vehicle. Today, most EVs will add 2 to 5 miles per minute at the plug, while a gasser or diesel will add anywhere from 80 miles a minute to 140 miles a minute.

4. Evacuation is an interesting question. Hurricanes don’t arrive instantly, so an EV owner has plenty of time to charge up. Because EVs don’t idle, and in hurricane country the range is quite a bit more than 225 miles, that objection is specious IMO, although there will always be exceptions, just as there are if an evacuee leaves without a full tank.


I am highly capable of discussing this. I am not an “EVangelist,” and am also not a mindless detractor. Electric motive power has roughly an 80-year history. There are pluses and minuses.

What you’re saying here is that the technology is not there, and you’re right. Forcing people to transition to a technology that isn’t ready isn’t a good thing, it’s a recipe for failure. In fact, it may make you more enemies than friends, depending on what their experience is like. Remember, everyone is used to hundreds of miles of range on a tank, and refilling that tank in just a couple of minutes.

DaveGinOly in reply to RandomCrank. | October 6, 2022 at 12:02 pm

The Rivian pickup truck comes with a battery capable of power the vehicle for about 400 miles, so the range is not much different from a conventional pickup. But using a home charging station takes 2 days to “fill the tank” (four days without a charging station, using just household current). Charging at a commercial station costs several times what it costs to charge at home, and, of course, still takes an inordinate amount of time.
The tech is not ready for prime-time.

5. EVs are more expensive to buy, although the differential is narrowing. Where they really shine on the home economics front is that the fuel is much cheaper, and so is maintenance. No oil changes, no engine work, no transmissions, no exhaust systems. The top 10 car repairs as measured by those OBD-2 ports don’t apply to EVs. My dinky one hasn’t had any EV-related repairs, period.

Past that, I do not think they should be subsidized or required.

The exhaust from a tier 4 or 5 diesel is cleaner that the air it takes in

Diesel over electric has worked well for many years in mining equipment. No reason diesel over electric couldn’t be a sensible alternative in passenger cars.

businessinsider.combiden-administration-energy-secretary-jennifer…Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm Violated the Federal STOCK Act – Insider

Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm violated a federal conflicts-of-interest and transparency law by improperly reporting up to a quarter-million dollars in stock sales, according to an Insider

businessinsider.comenergy-secretary-jennifer-granholm-investigation-stock…Republicans Want Investigation of Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm’s …

The lawmakers’ demands come in response to Insider‘s report that revealed Granholm had violated a federal conflicts-of-interest and transparency law by failing to report up to $240,000 in stock…

businessinsider.comenergy-secretary-jennifer-granholm-late-fees-stock-act…Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm Acknowledges Late Stock … – Insider

The about-face comes two weeks after Insider reported that Granholm disclosed nine stock transactions either weeks or months past a 30-day disclosure deadline prescribed by the Stop Trading on…

cnbc.com20220120energy-secretary-jennifer-granholm-violated-stock…Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm violated stock disclosure law … – CNBC

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm sold shares of stock nine times last year and did not disclose the sales within the legally required 45-day window, according to federal disclosure documents. The…

msn.comen-usnewspoliticsenergy-secretary-jennifer-granholm-violated-a…Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm violated a federal conflict-of …

She disclosed the trades in December 2021 — weeks or months after a federal deadline. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm violated a federal conflicts-of-interest and transparency law by…

dailywire.comnewsbiden-administration-official-broke-stock-trading-law…Biden Administration Official Broke Stock Trading Law Nine Times Last …

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm broke the STOCK Act — a law that requires top federal officials to disclose their asset transactions within a 45-day window — nine times last year. CNBC reported: The dates of Granholm’s stock sales ranged from April to late October, according to federal disclosure documents first reported by Business Insider.

freebeacon.combiden-administrationgranholm-failed-to-properly-disclose…Granholm Failed To Properly Disclose Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars …

Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm violated a law that requires her to disclose hundreds of thousands of dollars in stock trades. In 2021, Granholm made at least nine stock trades between April…