Are Electric Cars Feasible in the Midwest?

Jason wrote:

I was in Chicago last weekend from Friday-Monday and spent some time downtown. Yes, I saw plenty of Teslas sitting idle at a couple of charging stations. Poor buggers, I guess you should try to keep them at or above 50% if you plan on driving in rush hour traffic when it’s -10 degrees out. I guess you could plan on wearing a snowmobile suit and not run the heater to preserve the battery life to get to your final destination.

Let’s pull all of our tax subsidies (for those who actually pay in) going towards the charging stations and the vehicle purchase itself and let’s see if they can survive on there own.
I don’t recall getting a $ rebate for my Milwaukee battery operated tools or my lithium boat battery…

That’s the question I had and still have, was Henry ford subsidized heavy to build his auto manufacturing? Or did the American people buy on to the automobile idea? Similar to when first did construction we had cords spewed everywhere now it’s a thing of the past except for charging. But again the people drove the change not in a sense government ordered… and yes that is exactly what’s going on when the Federal government says all new cars built after certain date must electric.

We’re looking at swapping our smaller 2nd vehicle for an electric car (don’t have a make/model picked out yet) as 99% of our weekly driving is 10-40 miles round trip from our house, weekends we head up north (250+ miles round trip) and that’s when we would stick with our gas SUV. This limited distance would mean we could likely just get away with 110 outlet charger in the garage to replenish what juice we use overnight bypassing the need for the 220v charger. I also like the idea of having an electric car due to the volatility of the gas market and having SOME protection from any shortages/price gouging…

If you’re constantly traveling around 75% of an electric cars range, then you assume the risk of running out of juice due to weather impacts…

as others have mentioned, just wait a few years and whatever problems exist now will likely be greatly improved or resolved, the charging infrastructure will improve and the range will likely double…

because this is an outdoors forum and most of us ice fish, just remember all of the pushback and doubters 6 years ago when Ion came out with their electric auger…now 99% of all augers are electric and we love them! the only place you can get a gas auger is used on FBMP or C-List and why would you? (unless you’re drilling 300 holes in 2 feet of ice)

The Green People are driving the USA into being a crap country.

R Petersen wrote:

The Green People are driving the USA into being a crap country.

good lord…

Attachments:

1. 

   tin-foil-hat.png
   

The one other thing that I read that’s not talk about was the weight of these Evs, they were talking about how much more they weigh and how they been trying reduce weight in combustion engine cars to make the roads safer. And now they’re actually making them more dangerous with added weight to these cars, but probably mostly the trucks. The hummer ev is 9,063 pounds. That’s more than any one ton truck on the road.

Most posters when talking about their EV or wanting to get one, the driving factor is $$$. Volatile gas prices will become volatile Energy prices (already happening) for EV owners and everyone else. Government subsidies will disappear when its all implemented and you have no choice. Most say they will be using for short trips and then have the gasser for towing and long hauls. No mention of saving the planet in the decision ?

Was it in an earlier thread here or did I see it somewhere else where someone actually calculated the actual $ per gallon cost for an EV vs a gas vehicle? It said that an EV $ per gallon was effectively $10 per gallon because of all the infrastructure required and the owner only fitted the bill for about 1/3 of that. The rest fell on everyone else.

to big_g’s point about volatile energy prices i believe in California they have peak wattage times where electricity costs more if you use it during this time. I also think i heard MN was considering adopting a similar plan? Could be wrong about that. I wonder how that impacts electric car ownership. Obviously could be more costly to charge it but also wonder if we reach a point where laws will limit usage through methods other than cost increases

Again I think EV’s are pretty feasible in the Midwest, this Chicago situation seems to be an outlier, haven’t heard anything about the thousands of them in MN this or any previous year with significantly colder weather. And like Rip said a few times, I’m yet to see them dead on the side of the road or a bunch of them dead at a charging station.

Are there other mandates than the one in CA that starts in 11 years? If so, please share because that is not technically a mandate until, you know it’s actually mandated. It’s just a proposal now.

As far as subsidies go, I agree the market should decide, not the government. However, that would also mean removing the $10-50B/year gas subsidies there are as well. And the Gov’t can turn off your car/ability to fill it with gas now, if they so chose, really no different than their ability to do so with EV’s.

We dont want to model anything in MN after what California does, but unfortunately we are well down that path.

CaptainMusky wrote:

We dont want to model anything in MN after what California does, but unfortunately we are well down that path.

I get that, but a proposal not going to be in force until 2035 in CA, is hardly a threat to MN here and now. I mean anything 15+ years from now, and I’m hopefully not living here anymore.

I was talking even bigger than the EV mandate thing. There has been a lot of talk recently about shutting down the Nuclear power plants, turning off the coal plants and relying heavily on Windmills and Solar which would absolutely be a terrible idea and lead to blackouts in both winter and summer here. CA mainly has issues in the summer, but we have big loads throughout the year.

glenn57 wrote:

its not very environmentally friendly diggin for that lithium stuff……..

It’s ok for the IDO crowd to put them in their boat though right? Use them when cutting holes through the ice? Just not in cars or trucks. You may want to write a letter to James.

CaptainMusky wrote:

There has been a lot of talk recently about shutting down the Nuclear power plants, turning off the coal plants and relying heavily on Windmills and Solar

Xcels plan is basically that but ALSO to build natural gas plants to back it. The original plan was a single big fulltime one in Shelburne county but that got shot down. The alternative plan that was submitted was for two smaller natural gas “peaker” plants that only run as needed. I’m not sure where that is as far as being approved.

Tesla 3 sub-zero range test video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIUrOkttv7g

These guys put out good/realistic EV videos

So how come this guy didn’t have a problem charging vs the examples in Chicago.
Did he do what was suggested and precondition for a charge and the others did not?
So he pushed a button and the other idiots didn’t.
Might want to know how to run one before buying one.
Is it because he did not run it all the way to zero. Similar to runnning out of gas? If that’s the case well Duh.
Sounds as if this was the case for at least one person interviewed.

big_g wrote:

Nobody’s great grandpa was mandated to turning his horse in for a gas powered vehicle. Again… forcing/mandating something.

And not a single person in the USA has been forced/mandated to turn in their gas/diesel-powered vehicle.

And there are no plans or laws in place anywhere that would involve such. No, the California mandate does not force a “turning in” of gas/diesel vehicles. Even if it goes forward, it only affects future sales of gas/diesel vehicles and ONLY in California. As others have pointed out, it’s even unclear if CA plans to try to ban/prevent people from bringing new cars in from out of state after the ban or even if such a move would be legal under the interstate commerce clause.

My point is that the current performance of EVs cannot be used to judge their future potential or future performance. Change doesn’t work that way, just as you wouldn’t have been able to accurately predict the future of the automobile had you tried back in 1908, you can’t say in 2024 what the future of EVs will be.

If your only driving 10 to 50 miles or say a 100 a week or every couple weeks, why wouldn’t a small gas car getting 40 mpgs be the golden ticket. It will last you a life time and your gas bill will be 20 dollars a week. What are you saving ?

Bearcat89 wrote:

If your only driving 10 to 50 miles or say a 100 a week or every couple weeks, why wouldn’t a small gas car getting 40 mpgs be the golden ticket. It will last you a life time and your gas bill will be 20 dollars a week. What are you saving ?

If it were me, I’d want an EV for the convenience of never having to got to a gas station or charging station. It’s at 100% every morning in my garage. Can’t say that about a gasser.

No mandate ? THIS

When the Biden and EPA put zero emissions regulations on Auto Manufacturers… you will be hard pressed to buy an ICE vehicle. Basically its semantics at this point.

Bearcat89 wrote:

What are you saving

The planet?

Teslas have been around several years, Chicago has seen its fair share of cold weather in that time, but only now we see an article or news story that folks grab onto?

Afaic it’s more telling of the shoestrings the anti electric folks are hanging onto rather the notion of the very thread.

100 years ago people just started accepting that the horse and buggy were going to go into the past. Some still today still are in that Era. Just think what another 100 years will bring.

Deuces wrote:

Teslas have been around several years, Chicago has seen its fair share of cold weather in that time, but only now we see an article or news story that folks grab onto?

Afaic it’s more telling of the shoestrings the anti electric folks are hanging onto rather the notion of the very thread.

This is exactly the issue. 70% more EV sales in the last 2 years = what you see in Chicago. It’s only gonna get worse as more hit the roads and the infrastructure and those buying them (well to do people in suburbia with heated garages) are not the only ones buying them.

big_g wrote:

This is exactly the issue. 70% more EV sales in the last 2 years = what you see in Chicago. It’s only gonna get worse as more hit the roads and the infrastructure and those buying them (well to do people in suburbia with heated garages) are not the only ones buying them.

Good. If those like you who are brainwashed by BP keep seeing articles like this, you should be happy.

On the other hand, it’s the type of motivation that will help us to move on from a 150 year old technology that only continues to keep national security at risk.

Wow, that was my own formed opinion based on actual stats. Do you have an original thought in there ? National security../ not the fact that were all gonna cook to death in the global warming ?

Ripjiggen wrote:

So how come this guy didn’t have a problem charging vs the examples in Chicago.
Did he do what was suggested and precondition for a charge and the others did not?
So he pushed a button and the other idiots didn’t.
Might want to know how to run one before buying one.
Is it because he did not run it all the way to zero. Similar to runnning out of gas? If that’s the case well Duh.
Sounds as if this was the case for at least one person interviewed.

Well have actually seen videos, a lot in fact, of Tesla owners trying to put gas in them so while they have all these wonderful intentions they are not very bright.

biggill wrote:

150 year old technology that only continues to keep national security at risk.

That’s actually a pretty underrated point that doesn’t get talked about enough. Plenty of you have made valid arguments that the production and disposal of these batteries does plenty of environmental harm, the grid might not be able to handle it yet, plenty of logistical problems with charging, etc. All valid points.

The national security concern regarding oil that biggill brings up is a pretty solid point. How much defense spending has been spent in our lifetimes that can be traced back to oil? As the leader of the free world the U.S. intervenes and provides aid to many countries, but we’re sure willing to commit more and sacrifice lives when oil is involved.

Also, the future- and speculation-based pricing of filling up our tanks gets old. How many times do we see a big spike in gas prices because of some nonsense that never comes to fruition?

Our electrical grids are already treated as critical infrastructure and will likely need to be protected even more so as time goes on. But there are a lot of positives that can come out of being a country not as dependent on oil.

big_g wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Deuces wrote:</div>
Teslas have been around several years, Chicago has seen its fair share of cold weather in that time, but only now we see an article or news story that folks grab onto?

Afaic it’s more telling of the shoestrings the anti electric folks are hanging onto rather the notion of the very thread.

This is exactly the issue. 70% more EV sales in the last 2 years = what you see in Chicago. It’s only gonna get worse as more hit the roads and the infrastructure and those buying them (well to do people in suburbia with heated garages) are not the only ones buying them.

The video posted debunked the heated garage. He left it outside all night. He lost 1-2percent of charge.
So don’t think a heated garage is necessary.
He also didn’t charge in heated garage.
He simply followed the instructions and pushed a button before charging.

Again weird we are not seeing cars stranded on the highway here all week.

Apparently at some point Monday evening the Oak Brook location was reported to have all stalls out of order along with two other locations in the area.

Attachments:

1. 

   Screenshot_20240118_131605_Firefox.jpg