Hacker News Reader

Comment by bombcar | Hacker News Reader

The article hints at it, but there are two related but separate problems:

1. Perception by non-EV buyers that charging is difficult, slow, unavailable, etc. This is what Tesla fought against at the beginning and arguably has one of the best "solutions" for.

2. Actual usage by EV owners; if the first is perception only then this one shouldn't exist much; but if they are complaining, there is a massive real problem that needs to be addressed - otherwise the EV owners will become non-EV owners over time, and it'll be harder to get them to go back.

(If I were a car company wanting to reassure people about the EV issues, I'd have a "bring the car in anytime during the first 5 years and we'll rent you for cheap or free a hybrid for those long trips you're worried about" or similar. The vast majority of vehicle travel can be done with any EV, because they start and end at home and are less than 200 miles.)

View on HN

> Perception by non-EV buyers that charging is difficult, slow, unavailable, etc. This is what Tesla fought against at the beginning and arguably has one of the best "solutions" for.

There’s also an entire segment being ignored, those using their vehicles for off-road, long distance trips with near a ton in cargo weight. How do you recharge in the middle of public land when there’s nothing around you for miles?

Also I wouldn’t call this perception, as it implies it’s not true. It doesn’t take 45 mins to refuel a vehicle, therefore it does take 10 times longer or more to recharge an EV. Let’s not even touch the amount of power these things use, each vehicle pulling more than a house does.

> each vehicle pulling more than a house does.

Not even close.

The average American house uses 30 kWh per day. The average American drives 37 miles per day, which requires 8kWh in a Tesla.

But the tesla still pulls 280kw+, which is in fact more than a house

On an industrial site with an industrial grid connection serving hundreds of cars per charger. I'm not sure why a house comparison is relevant.

Because I can fuel my car up at home in 5 minutes. any liquid or even gas based fuel would be capable of the same. But now I can only use a level 2 charger at home.

We haven’t even touched on evacuations and how many people will be killed because they’re unable to charge their EV. People are supposed to go wait in like to charge their car for 30+ minutes? Have you seen the lines at gas stations during evacuations? How long do you think they’ll get when refueling takes 10 times longer?

I'd rather evacuate in an electric car. My EV always has 400km of range every morning because I plug it in every night. OTOH I don't fill up my gasoline car until it goes under a quarter tank. So worst case I might have 100km of range.

The other aspect is that electric cars gain range in stop and go traffic and gasoline cars lose range. If there's a traffic jam and speeds average 20km/hr I can probably get 500km of range out of the EV. OTOH an ICE car loses range in stop and go traffic. I might be lucky to get 50km on an eighth of a tank in my gas car in stop and go traffic.

Except you run out of charge during said stop and go traffic. With a liquid fueled car you just add more.

I’m guessing that since you’re using km instead of mi you’re outside the US. Perhaps your experiences won’t translate over here? The US tends to be larger than most countries so the distance traveled to evacuate is longer.

We need to slow down and research newer technologies. A german company can create 1600 liters of carbon neutral fuel using 1 MW of power. This fuel can run on existing engines. Those 1600 liters can fill 40 average sized cars. Yet that same megawatt can only charge 3.7 ish Teslas.

Are you also aware that this is the second time EVs have been tried? They lost out to gasoline for all these same reasons.

I'm in Canada, which is bigger and sparser than the US.

The only place I can think of in the US where you would need to drive more than 320 miles to get out of a disaster area is Miami. Everywhere else if there's a hurricane then you travel at right angles to its path. In Miami there's only one direction you can go.

In Canada you are concentrated into mostly the lower 1/3 of the country, which is smaller than the US. So sorry but no.

There’s other places, like leaving CA, WA, and OR now and the tornadoes in the middle.

Average people don’t charge their car every night. Even if they did, what’s the storage ratio for liquid vs electric fuels? This directly translates into how much you can have on hand in an emergency.

You’ve ignored every issue stating “it’s not a problem for me” yet I’m guessing you’ve never been in this situation living in Canada. Maybe think outside the anecdotes and realize you’ve not experienced every situation in life.

Liquid fuels does not mean gasoline. Stop thinking this way.

Dude, I've lived through a tornado. It left a path of destruction 800m wide. We evacuated in our electric car, and drove to a friend's place 5km away. Range was not an issue.

Many gas stations were down because of loss of power and lines at the working stations were an hour long. But our friend had power, so we just plugged into 115V at their house overnight.

I know dozens of people with electric cars. Every single one of them has a plugin at their home, and every one of them plugs it in over night. A couple of them plug into a regular 115v outlet overnight rather than a faster charger, but everybody plugs in every night. Why would you give up one of the main advantages of EV's to save yourself the two seconds of effort it takes to plug the car in?

Great, and I’ve live through a hurricane where there was no power for a literal month yet national guard easily brought in gas trucks and cans. Judging by your idea that electricity is always available (why do people in FL have 5kw generators?) suggests you’re inexperienced in these matters and also shouldn’t be spreading your opinion.

And again, why are you so enamored with EVs? There are other options that actually have a chance at mass adoption.

If you have gas and generators, you have electricity and can charge your EV.

I add 320 miles of range to my EV for $8. A gallon of synthetic fuel is projected to cost $25/gallon once it hits mass production. Hydrogen is completely non-viable for emergency situations. What other options are you thinking of?

Synthetic fuels and hydrogen. You're just being closed minded.

> $25/gallon once it hits mass production.

Which one? I’m guessing you just did research on this and just learned they existed? One of them costs $80/liter now, but said they can get it down to $6/liter through scaling.

> Hydrogen is completely non-viable for emergency situations.

Why? propane is shipped in, you don’t believe getting compressed gas in an emergency is possible?

Again, do you have a financial interest in EVs? Or you just trying to win this argument? I’ve never met someone so in love with electric cars. I can certainly understand the desire to get rid of gasoline, but to force people into electric when there’s tons of problems that people see means you won’t get the adoption you’re looking for.

You know there’s even another issue with EV I haven’t brought up yet. Every time you charge it, you lose a little range. This isn’t true with a liquid fueled vehicle in that the fuel tank gets a little smaller after every refuel.

> > $25/gallon once it hits mass production.

> Which one? I’m guessing you just did research on this and just learned they existed? One of them costs $80/liter now, but said they can get it down to $6/liter through scaling.

You do realize there's only a 20% difference between $6/l and $25/g? IOW, they're basically the same price.

> Why? propane is shipped in, you don’t believe getting compressed gas in an emergency is possible?

Propane is shipped as a liquid with a high volumetric energy density. Hydrogen is shipped as a gas with a very low volumetric energy density. You'd need a lot of tanks of hydrogen to replace a single tank of propane.

Hydrogen needs to be regularly recompressed, requiring a lot of electricity. It's then further compressed before fueling a car, meaning that the hydrogen fuelling stations in California can only fuel 3 cars per hour.

Hydrogen leaks like crazy. NASA delayed the Artemis I mission by 3 months due to hydrogen leaks. If NASA can't do it...

> Every time you charge it, you lose a little range. This isn’t true with a liquid fueled vehicle in that the fuel tank gets a little smaller after every refuel.

The fuel efficiency of a gas car gets worse over time, so the same effect happens to them too.

Well you haven’t answered my question about your potential financial involvement with EVs nor why you’re so enamored by them. I’ll continue this conversation and disprove your recent post when you explain why it must be EVs we use instead of any other much better option.

> A german company can create 1600 liters of carbon neutral fuel using 1 MW of power.

If they can do that, they've broken the laws of physics. A litre of fuel contains 9kWh of energy. 100% efficient synthesis would result in 111 litres of fuel.

You can't fuel up your car at home in 5 minutes. You have to go to a gas station, unless you're storing 20 gallons of gas at home for some reason. If there is an evacuation, you think you'll be able to get gas at a station? I doubt it. Would you be able to find a plug to plug into, even if it is a regular 15a/20a house plug? yeah, probably. If you're charging at home, like most owners do, you'll generally be topped off at 100% or close to it, so you don't need to go anywhere first, you'll just get in your car and go.

> You can't fuel up your car at home in 5 minutes. You have to go to a gas station, unless you're storing 20 gallons of gas at home for some reason. If there is an evacuation, you think you'll be able to get gas at a station? I doubt it.

If you have not been in this scenario, you shouldn’t comment on what your opinion is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com