octave

https://6abc.com/post/donald-trump-escorted-off-stage-secret-service-during/15056992/

I would disagree. There are 2 challenges in Norway, cold and hills. I don't really think for the most part range is a problem here. People even in the country are diving EVs Regional Queenslanders say electric vehicles worth it for fuel savings but challenges remain The point I am trying to make with Norway is that yes it is smaller in size and has a smaller population it is able to provide a comprehensive charging network without the grid melting and without cars bursting into flames all over the place. Obviously, we face different challenges here however I fear we are not good at preparing for the future. Why should we keep importing oil when we have the natural resources to produce electricity? We also have nearly all of the minerals to produce our own batteries. If nothing else simple self-sufficiency is a good reason not to rely on oil from the Middle East. Yes I think the figure as of 2020 was 98% https://www.iea.org/reports/norway-2022/executive-summaryF Anyway bottom line.... don't buy one if you don't want to

Nope

If batteries are so dangerous you would expect this to show up in the statistics of a country like Norway. It is a fact that EV battery fires are much rarer than petrol car fires. It is true that a Lithium Ion battery fire is more tricky to put out it is not a common problem. Many new EVs now use LFP and some are now using Sodium- ion both exceedingly fire-safe.

I am pretty sure that is sales of new fossil fuel cars, not existing cars. Norway has 100% renewable power from hydro and wind, It has built great charging infrastructure so it is a bit of a no brainer really

The fact that KGW gets 2 hours of free power to charge his car is not because the power company are being nice. Keeping the grid going is about matching use with supply. There are various dips during the day and overnight. It is advantageous to the power generators not to curtail production too much because it can be inefficient. The example often given by the EV doubters is that "everyone will get home from work and plug their car in and this will bring down the grid" With variable pricing charging this way will cost more. My son's Tesla is plugged in a couple of times a week (normally). When he gets home from work he plugs it in but it does not charge straight away. in the early hours, it starts charging automatically and he only pays a few cents a KWh Just going back to the grid. I think there is a lack of imagination of future (and even present-day) tech. Think back to the late 80s. I remember getting into computing. I had bought an early modem and used to connect to bulletin boards at some ridiculously slow rate. If someone had told me that in my lifetime we would be downloading gigs of data, watching our television over the net and video calling our friends and relatives I might have been sceptical. If I had been told that almost every house would be connected by cable or fibre or wirelessly I would have said "ya dreaming" If our communications "grid" for want of a better word has developed this much I am pretty certain that our power grid has plenty of potential.

Onetrack, I think I am suggesting that electricity supplied by the grid and power generators and retailers will be in competition with electricity supplied from my roof. If I had an EV I would look for a source of electricity that is a reasonable price. I am not necessarily talking about competion between retailers

I guess one advantage of electricity is that it is possible to provide it yourself either with your grid supply or solar. Charging networks will be in competition with grid-supplied to the house and home-generated electricity. Oil companies have a bit of a monopoly on the product they sell.

ICing (the act of parking an iC car in a charging spot to prevent an EV charging) is very much a thing. Here is an extreme case. EV Charging Station ICE’d By Ford Ranger Raptor Is Oh So Childish I simply don't understand why people are so passionately against EVs. Whilst there can be well-presented arguments highlighting the cons of EVs there seems to be so much hysteria. I once received this video from an anti EV type which was supposed to illustrate that an EV is a bomb on wheels....................however A Tesla burst into flames during a crash test. The organizer admitted it was staged The thing is there are a few cases of EVs burning that are real examples but these people don't want to talk about statistics or even different battery chemistries. They just want to present a headline or spectacular video. Dont like EVs don't buy one. If the conversion to EVs is so flawed and grids will start to collapse then the conversion will cease. The notion that we will be sitting in the dark because of electrification is too much for it and that no one has foreseen this or done anything about this seems a little hard to believe. The growth of EVs will continue along and the grid will either adapt or we will have slow the rate at which we change or perhaps look for some alternate technology

I think I have made this point many times. I have often made to point that no one here will be forced to go EV because it would be impossible to make that huge change in a short time. Throwing away every IC car that still has a few years left in it is not desirable from an energy-to-build perspective. Again using Norway as an example they are aggressively EV and have been for a few years and have got to around 25%. We are a lot less aggressive in this country so it will take years and years before we are anywhere near Norway's figures. Again I don't have strong feelings about whether an individual is for or against buying an EV. I am interested in factual arguments. For now and for quite a few years into the future we will all have the choice to buy an EV or an IC. I do believe that it will not be bans on IC that be the major factor in the mass uptake of EVs but it will simply be the cheaper more convenient choice. Many of the criticisms of EVs are a little old hat. For example, cartoons showing someone pitching a tent whilst waiting for their car to charge are based on bygone days. Likewise cartoons that show an EV plug ultimately into a coal-fired power station are also out of date. I am not suggesting you post this kind of stuff but it is a constant in my mail/social media. Again I think there is plenty of expertise from adequately qualified people. I guess as a counter-argument I could suggest that the anti-side is often guilty of "pushing an agenda without knowledge of recent developments in new technology. In terms of pushing an agenda, I rarely start these conversations I usually read something and think, "Well hang on that doesn't seem correct" and I feel the need to toss a few facts in. As a blatant example, someone here (not you OME) suggested that to blow the horn on a Tesla you have to use the screen. This is false. We discussed tyres being horrendously expensive. I asked my son (who has read some of this thread) about tyres and he sends me a link to the tyres he uses which are pretty much the same price as for IC. If I am a zealot then I am a zealot for well-researched opinions backed with evidence. Whilst I would acknowledge that there are EV zealots I would suggest that there are as many if not more anti EV zealots. I find it hard to understand the passion that some people have. There is a thread on this forum about motorcycles. I am not a fan of motor cycles and I don't have any ambition to ride one however I have no interest in going on that thread and arguing about whether motorcycles are too dangerous or noisy.

The present electrical system certainly would not sustain 100% EV adoption. The present system will never be sufficient for the future. As an example it is often said that Australia should do more manufacturing rather than just shipping raw minerals overseas. One could say that we don't have the power system to support that so lets not do it. Th point is that history is not over. The grid has always grown to meet our needs. Although Norway is blessed with hydro I don't believe it has had to rebuild its poles and wires. The neighsayers seem to think that those in favour of the transition to EV have not even given a thought to how ERVs will be charged in the future. There are plenty of scientific papers on the subject and experts even here in Australia such as Blorn Sturmberg at ANU School of Engineering. Norway? I guess if you are just sitting back and scratching your head and saying but how they...........? There is a wealth of good quality information out there. It is actually intellectually stimulating to take on new knowledge and not just dwell in the past. Here is a video that you might find interesting. Yes, Norway has enormous supplies of hydro and other renewables but they have not totally rebuilt their grid. Two cars and many more can be charged simultaneously.

OME maybe if you are genuinely curious you should do a search for bi-directional charging and V2G (vehicle to grid). The old model of the grid is like the water system. The water flows one way from the reservoir to the tap in the house i.e. electricity flows from the power station to the house. The modern smart grid is more like the internet, electricity flows both ways. This gives the individual the opportunity to buy electricity and sell electricity. The neighsayers seem to present a situation where EVs are only a draw on the grid. Renewables need storage. This is where grid batteries come in. Imagine when most cars are EV. A 70 to 100KWh battery at almost every house. These things are not just stupid ideas but they are being put into practice mostly overseas at this stage. It is true that 20% to 80% is optimal however in if my son is going on a road trip you do charge perhaps the night before to 100%, It is not my practice to fill my petrol-driven car to its full fuel capacity because it does not make sense to drag around all that extra weight. At the other end of the scale, I usually don't run it down to near-empty.

I would think by now that real-world experience and statistics would be interesting. I believe in Nowray around 25% of the car fleet is EV. I would imagine that the accident rate would be similar to other comparable countries. The question I would ask is are there significant numbers of first untrained first responders being injured? Indeed there should be statistics about how many accidents result in significant battery damage or fires. Anyone helping out after an accident in any vehicle should be cautious. I had a van I was driving catch fire. The engine was under the seat so the cabin quickly filled with smoke. There was little I could do about it. The fire brigade arrived and they all had breathing equipment not available to me or any other bystanders. The idea that educating the public about EVs obviously good. I am sure in the early days of petrol-engined cars the public had to learn the dangers of flammable liquids.

I dont know about IC cars and fuel during crash tests but EVs do have batteries during test. The tests can evaluate fire hazard either caused by thermal runaway – when lithium-ion batteries experience rapid uncontrollable heating – in ruptured EV batteries or gas tank leaks of internal combustion vehicles. None of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests of EVs have sparked any fires. New Car Assessment Program crash test reports yield comparable findings. While real-world data analysis on vehicle fires involving EVs is limited, it appears that media and social media scrutiny of EV fire hazard is Electrified vehicles (including battery electric, fuel cell and hybrid-electric vehicles) are subjected to the same ANCAP crash protection and crash avoidance tests as any other vehicle rated by ANCAP. Some additional elements are monitored by ANCAP as part of the testing process: • The output of the high-voltage battery is monitored. High voltage batteries are fitted with a ‘safety cut-out’ that will rapidly disconnect the battery in the event of a crash. We monitor the output to record if and when this cut-out operates. • The vehicle body is checked safely for any highvoltage immediately after the crash. If the safety cut-out were to fail and a damaged high-voltage wire was to be in contact with the vehicle body, then a person touching the vehicle could be injured. Test technicians use insulated gloves and stand on a rubber mat to ensure that the vehicle has no high voltages and is safe to touch. • The battery is examined for any sign of damage, such as intrusion into the battery unit, leakage of fluids, fire or abnormal heat. We can all play our part to ensure the future of the Australian vehicle fleet is both safe and green. Safety and environmental performance are top-of-mind considerations for new car buyers today, and ANCAP encourages all consumers and fleet buyers to consider the safest green vehicle they can afford. Safe and green: Environmental outcomes should not come at the cost of safety.

Yes, they do, why wouldn't they?

No that is not right.

In what sense?

It would have an electronically operated handbrake as do many modern cars regardless of how they are propelled. I found the handbrake on the Tesla to be very user-friendly and effective. What is an electronic handbrake?

I think there are places in Australia that are suitable for some types of geothermal Although Australia has no volcanic structures, there is significant potential for geothermal energy to be extracted using hydrothermal and hot fractured rock processes. From what I can see the problem is not that it can't be done but that ii is at this point uneconomic. Geothermal energy in Australia Australia has considerable geothermal energy potential, however the electricity produced is not financially viable in Australia due to three challenges: finding it: identifying suitable geothermal resources flowing it: producing hot fluid from the geothermal reservoirs at a high rate financing it: overcoming the significant up-front capital costs associated with enhanced geothermal system technologies and the cost of transmitting electricity from remote locations.

It is legal if fixed I think. Obviously, you can't use other functions. I do not know about this particular vehicle but I know in the Tesla you can set the screen as you like it if you find too much information to be distr5acting. My son often has his screen act like a huge rearview mirror using the rear camera, pretty useful. It is reasonable to question whether having this many screens is necessary. Using a phone as a navigational device/GPS while riding is prohibited unless it is secured in a commercially designed holder fixed to the vehicle. All other functions (including video calls, texting and emailing) are prohibited. The penalty is a fine of $545 applies.

Whilst that particular project may not have been successful this does not reflect in geothermal power. It does work overseas. Either our location is unsuitable or perhaps we are just not innovative enough. United States* – 3,900 MW (updated our numbers as per the notes below) Indonesia – 2,418 MW – with a last minute addition for 2023 at Sorik Marapi Philippines – 1,952 MW – updated numbers by DOE Turkiye – 1,691 MW – corrected numbers based on official license numbers by the Turkish authorities New Zealand – 1,042 MW – based on official numbers by the national regulator Kenya – 985 MW – addition of the first 35 MW of three plants at Menegai coming online in 2023 and some updates by numbers reported by KenGen (the country is inching closer to joining the Geothermal GW Country Club) Mexico – 976 MW – no change, yet updated numbers from the Ministry of Energy Italy – 916 MW – correction of our reporting of early 2023. Iceland – 754 MW Japan – 576 MW – corrections of plants and number based on official government numbers.

I agree with every word jerry didn't say.

As Nev points out brakes on an EV last for ages due to regen braking. As far as tyres go, I think perhaps in earlier times there were fewer tyre choices. Tyres for a Tesla are not super expensive and there seems to be a wide choice. Buy Tesla Model 3 Tyres from $169 I think they have the potential to wear out quicker depending on driving style.