The United States Is Now the Largest Global Crude Oil Producer

Think of it this way: You go on a long trip and need to stop for gas somewhere along the trip. Instead, you just plug in at your destination. That saves you a stop.

So chargers can be at places that encourage longer stops and since there is no real environmental impact that means they can be placed about anywhere a parking space already is.

But it’s also about about refueling (i.e. charging). Until a spot at a supercharger is as easy to come by as a gas station wherever you go, it won’t be the same. Not to mention having to wait 30+ minutes to charge, which can add up on a road trip.

For people who can get away with charging at home & work, it's fine. For people like me who do stuff like 170 mile trips to Tahoe often, I won't be able to have an electric car without "range anxiety" any time soon.

I don't see why gas-electric hybrids, with say, 20-50 miles of electric-only range aren't more popular. That would eliminate the vast majority of fossil fuel usage [1], and avoid this problem entirely. It also seems a lot cheaper than loading a car with hundreds of miles worth of batteries.

1. http://www.solarjourneyusa.com/EVdistanceAnalysis.php

so at my destination I need to account for distance back to the nearest super charger. Fortunately for me the nearest at one destination is fifty miles but another is little closer. That knocks off 100 usable miles right there. Since the recommendation is not to charge to full except on long legs of your trip that will leave me about 150 miles of local driving.

What I think is going to be fun is that we already look back at the beta generation of sub 100 mile range EVs as unacceptable and the crop of 100-150 mile range EVs will join them soon. Within 5 years or so I bet 200-250 mile range EVs will be seen as quaint at the upper price points but mainstream in the 20k price range.

However EV range increases face many hurdles. the first is range is weight. 310 mile range packs in the 3 are just shy of 1100 pounds. Charging them to full with current SC tech is still an hour. At home at 32amp it is 30 miles of range an hour and damn if that cord gets very warm. Homes can reasonably be expected to step up to 48amp but after that requires rethinking how we build homes. On the road it will require systems beyond the Tesla Supercharger system but that involves its own problems of heat.

For anyone who wants one car and does trips the require more than one charging cycle 250+ is a requirement. Also, part of range anxiety just is not the range but the time it takes to replenish that range

The main issue is one of cost, a secondary issue is style. Tesla's are expensive, but other automakers will fill the gap, with cheaper cars. Unfortunately today all electric cars except tesla are uniformly ugly.

I think people are ready for an electric car for daily commuting, but the cars need to be in the $20K range, 200 miles, and not look like crap.

Also keep in mind it doesnt make sense to sell an existing car to buy an electric car, so there is a 8-15 year lifecycle for people to ditch their old cars.

It isn't enough when I need to find an outlet I can use legally--which will likely be NEMA 14-50 240V, if you can find one--and then spend an hour waiting for the charge to finish for every 20 to 30 miles I drove off my range. That's 8 hours. Lengthy, but doable for overnight. But I can't wait 8 hours every time I drive 4. My modal road trip is 700 miles, with an overnight at 420 miles (or 280 on the return). The current state of electric charging stations is such that I couldn't drive that trip with just "level 2" AC outlet charging.

If it's just a 120V outlet, it'll take 2.5 days to recharge 250 miles of range. The electricity will still cost much less than gasoline, of course, but road trips in the US can easily total thousands of miles. It's a big country, with lots of highways, crappy passenger train service, and airline service with increasing numbers of drawbacks.

DC fast charger networks are an absolute requirement to combat range anxiety. It isn't just how far you can drive at once, but how long it takes to refill your range. Your range circle shrinks as you drive, and you need to recharge before it gets too small to have a charging station in it. So you can't just drive out your full range. You still have to plan your hops between charging stations, and if those are 180 miles apart, any extra range below 360 miles won't make a difference, because you couldn't skip a charging opportunity otherwise.

I think this year is a watershed along those lines. My guess is you will start seeing used hybrids shortly (within 3 years) at reasonable prices.

Quite a few "hybrid" cars in California are losing their ability to use the carpool lanes because there are so many of them. You now have to be able to do something like 40-50 miles on battery or you don't qualify anymore.

In addition, I think GM has moved out of the first tier of federal rebates on their electric/hybrid cars because they've sold so many of them.

You probably won't find used Teslas, but I bet you will start finding used Volts/Bolts.

From my point of view, the biggest issue I have is that while my internal combustion engine car is 25 years old, I haven't been able to keep a hybrid for more than 5 years because the technology is still evolving so quickly.

engines directly? variable valve timing will be common place and variable compression has debuted. more forced air systems and better injection tuning all present themselves. there is even ongoing work on two strokes and some of them are delivering better performance and emissions than four strokes.

- regenerative braking reduces the efficiency penalty of city driving. While a normal car sees a 25-30% mileage drop in stop-and-go traffic, a hybrid sees about 5-8%.

- the actual engine is more efficient! The gasoline engine in hybrid vehicles usually replaces the Otto cycle with the Atkinson cycle. The latter is more efficient but has lower power, which in hybrids is compensated by an electric assist that turns on when accelerating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle

By taking these two effects together a non-plug-in hybrid can reduce fuel use in a city driving condition by more than 40%. I didn't make that number up: the 2019 standard Camry has 29 city mpg, while the 2019 hybrid Camry is rated for 51. The hybrid uses 56% as much fuel as the conventional engine! With a plug-in hybrid that can drop even lower.

Unfortunately the marketing around all of this was muddled and most consumers have never heard of the Atkinson cycle. The original hybrids (Prius, Insight) were molded for a Japanese market, where simple and cute is a winning proposition, but American gearheads thought it looked and drove like a toy, a perception which was compounded by the fact that early hybrids made self-maintenance nearly impossible. Just replacing the 12V battery on a Prius is a major pain (speaking from experience!). Atkinson hybrids quickly became associated with a certain type of person and, for a while, many/most car geeks thought the real efficiency breakthrough were the German companies' maintenance-friendly and appropriately-scented turbodiesels, and we all know how that turned out. Hybrids have never captured more than 3.2% of the US market, but even if no highway-viable electric cars appear, a switch to plug-in hybrids could erase more than half of car-related GHG emissions.

I know all of this mostly because of one very old and very stubborn former engineer who was impervious to every kind of advertisement and cultural stereotype, and who studied the technology in the Prius and bought one new in 2009. Everyone else in the family made fun of him, but Grandpa just didn't care, and raved about the Prius to anyone who would listen. Most of us, including me at the time, believed the meme that Atkinson hybrids were a marketing gimmick and only relevant if you drove in the city often enough to take advantage of the regenerative brakes, and anyway, turbodiesels were the future. Grandpa didn't live long enough to see himself get proven right, but I still drive his car.

My guess is we'll see the price fall closer to the extraction price, but less than where these petrostates can sustain themselves. So we'll see a succession of petrostate collapses, each one taking supply offline and popping the price back up. Would be an interesting time to trade crude.

I don’t have the knowledge to get any more detailed, unfortunately — This is all secondhand from some oil industry software engineers.

These wells are productive enough that you don't need to hydraulically fracture them.

Camels have a reputation (I'm not sure to what extent it's deserved) of being somewhat more obstreperous; nonetheless, I have a hard time extrapolating to 50K, were camels in a like position to horses in the U.S. Not for a "decent" camel.

In current Saudi Arabia, sure, maybe. But current Saudi Arabia is not what's being talked about, as being "down the line".

P.S. Just don't hook my friend's horse up to a cart or sleigh or the like. She was never trained for that, and at this point, she's not having any of it. She also doesn't think much of jumping; smart horse, her joints will last longer.

Presumably a camel that anyone wants to ride has been raised and trained properly. That camel is ever going to be ridden, then putting down $400 for a warm body is only the beginning of the investment.

New York recovered from Sandy, but the city would need massive changes if that water level became routine.