Off Topic: Road Tripping in a Tesla Model X P100D
07-30-2018, 05:57 PM
#31
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
the electricity rate I used for calculations is the published "super-charger rate" used by Tesla for billing purposes if you have to pay to use a supercharger. This is _NOT_ my residential rate (which is $0.1254 / kWh in Northern California with PG&E).
Tesla's published rates can be found here - and they vary by state
https://www.tesla.com/support/supercharging
California is $0.26/kWh
Oregon is $0.24/kWh
some states are billed by "time" to avoid Tesla running afoul of "utility" regulations.
Tesla's published rates can be found here - and they vary by state
https://www.tesla.com/support/supercharging
California is $0.26/kWh
Oregon is $0.24/kWh
some states are billed by "time" to avoid Tesla running afoul of "utility" regulations.
07-31-2018, 01:09 AM
#32
Power is cheap in the US, our off peak household rates are around 30 cents kWh and getting worse in some states due to the additional cost of renewables forced infrastructure changes and costs.
07-31-2018, 10:04 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Power is cheap in the US, our off peak household rates are around 30 cents kWh and getting worse in some states due to the additional cost of renewables forced infrastructure changes and costs.
I'd love any evidence that the power rate you're paying is a direct result of a "forced" march to renewables - the research I've read and the overall consensus from utilities is that renewables are cost effective and competitive with most forms of power generation - all except for Coal which is wildly dirty and wildly cheap - but Coal is on it's way out because it's just not sustainable from an environmental impact.
the ONLY research I've encountered with this line of reasoning is Koch funded (coal mine owning) research discussing the limited impact of decommissioning Coal plans and whole sale replacement with other forms of power - well that's got to happen regardless of EV and Coal is outdated and simply too costly environmentally (I prefer to avoid black lung and acid rain, and smog)
it's a good throw away line, but bear very little inspection.
I don't hope to convince you - but my personal experience and community that I live in counters this line of thinking with actual deployment and factual data - but you're welcome to believe what ever you want to believe.
07-31-2018, 10:11 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Where are yo located? I’m in Illinois and average about $0.13/kWh. I’ve looked into solar panels on my roof, and it’s not cost effective compared to a coworker who lives in the UK and has them.
08-01-2018, 07:19 AM
#36
08-01-2018, 07:42 AM
#37
yeah - when I review my bills and other utllities around the country I see increased costs from decommissioning of poorly planned power plants (Nuclear for example) - but very little evidence if any "forced" migration to renewables and again I'm not sure what you're talking about - communities/states/corporation/countries that have moved to a successful renewable mix are NOT seeing increase cost and have actually stabilized their long term power costs.
I'd love any evidence that the power rate you're paying is a direct result of a "forced" march to renewables - the research I've read and the overall consensus from utilities is that renewables are cost effective and competitive with most forms of power generation - all except for Coal which is wildly dirty and wildly cheap - but Coal is on it's way out because it's just not sustainable from an environmental impact.
the ONLY research I've encountered with this line of reasoning is Koch funded (coal mine owning) research discussing the limited impact of decommissioning Coal plans and whole sale replacement with other forms of power - well that's got to happen regardless of EV and Coal is outdated and simply too costly environmentally (I prefer to avoid black lung and acid rain, and smog)
it's a good throw away line, but bear very little inspection.
I don't hope to convince you - but my personal experience and community that I live in counters this line of thinking with actual deployment and factual data - but you're welcome to believe what ever you want to believe.
I'd love any evidence that the power rate you're paying is a direct result of a "forced" march to renewables - the research I've read and the overall consensus from utilities is that renewables are cost effective and competitive with most forms of power generation - all except for Coal which is wildly dirty and wildly cheap - but Coal is on it's way out because it's just not sustainable from an environmental impact.
the ONLY research I've encountered with this line of reasoning is Koch funded (coal mine owning) research discussing the limited impact of decommissioning Coal plans and whole sale replacement with other forms of power - well that's got to happen regardless of EV and Coal is outdated and simply too costly environmentally (I prefer to avoid black lung and acid rain, and smog)
it's a good throw away line, but bear very little inspection.
I don't hope to convince you - but my personal experience and community that I live in counters this line of thinking with actual deployment and factual data - but you're welcome to believe what ever you want to believe.
In 2014-2015 the price per mWh in South Australia was $42, in 2017-2018 it is $109 per mWh - prices have more than doubled in three years
In 2014-2015 the price per mWh in Victoria was $32, in 2017-2018 it is $99 per mWh - a mere threefold increase in three years
These are the two states that are attempting to get to 50% and 25% renewables by 2025.
Information courtesy of the Australian Energy Regulator AER.
08-01-2018, 08:57 AM
#38
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I can’t speak to Australia - in the US it’s different.
08-01-2018, 09:19 AM
#39
The US is at the start of the journey in many respects, for example approximately 63% of US generation comes from fossil fuels with renewables (excluding hydro) accounting for about 10% and with hydro ~18%
In contrast our renewables account for 26.5% of generation and its increasing quickly as are prices............
BTW we don't have a problem with black lung, smog or acid rain but we do have a problem with electricity prices..........perhaps the US needs to work on its generation blend - perhaps there needs to be some thought into why so many people by an F series Ford and not a Model S, perhaps politics needs to be taken out of the equation, perhaps perhaps............
Its your average Joe you need to look to................given there are no 30K Model Xs and non on the horizon, you'll have your work cut out.
In contrast our renewables account for 26.5% of generation and its increasing quickly as are prices............
BTW we don't have a problem with black lung, smog or acid rain but we do have a problem with electricity prices..........perhaps the US needs to work on its generation blend - perhaps there needs to be some thought into why so many people by an F series Ford and not a Model S, perhaps politics needs to be taken out of the equation, perhaps perhaps............
Its your average Joe you need to look to................given there are no 30K Model Xs and non on the horizon, you'll have your work cut out.
08-01-2018, 09:41 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
2017 West cost generation mix skews considerably more renewables and less fossil fuels - http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/ele...tem_power.html - coal is 0.15% and other non-natural gas fossil fuels being in-consequential - Natural Gas is 43% - with the rest being renewables/low impact/zero or near zero emissions - the trend is away from fossil fuels - and California is ahead of it's "impossible" target that was set 10 years ago
I'm sorry you are having problems with electricity prices in Australia - sounds like you have your work cut out for you. I'm going to read up on the "problems" and see what they are doing differently that might account for the differences.
$0.30/kWh (ASD) is about $0.22/kWh (USD) so your prices are inline with other industrialized nations and slightly cheaper than the California average ($0.28 USD)
I'm sorry you are having problems with electricity prices in Australia - sounds like you have your work cut out for you. I'm going to read up on the "problems" and see what they are doing differently that might account for the differences.
$0.30/kWh (ASD) is about $0.22/kWh (USD) so your prices are inline with other industrialized nations and slightly cheaper than the California average ($0.28 USD)
08-01-2018, 09:50 AM
#41
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
here are some interesting headlines I've found doing some quick research on California wholesale megawatt pricing…
Pricing chart I found shows a monthly range of $20-$40 per/megawatt in California in May 2018 - which includes the cost of renewables - if Australia is having problems with a wide variation in electricity prices I'm not sure the entire problem can be laid at the feet of a push for renewables. 5-10 year price per-megawatt cost trends in the Western US do not support that hypothesis that moving to renewables automatically increases price per-kWh - now I'm not saying that hasn't happened in AUS (it clearly has) but I am saying it doesn't have to be that way and the move to renewables can be cost effective and beneficial - but a lot depends on how it's managed and deployed.
In 2016, U.S. energy expenditures per unit GDP were the lowest since at least 1970
Air conditioning accounts for about 12% of U.S. home energy expenditures
Major utilities continue to increase spending on U.S. electric distribution systems
U.S. refinery capacity virtually unchanged between 2017 and 2018
Wind generators’ cost declines reflect technology improvements and siting decisions
Pricing chart I found shows a monthly range of $20-$40 per/megawatt in California in May 2018 - which includes the cost of renewables - if Australia is having problems with a wide variation in electricity prices I'm not sure the entire problem can be laid at the feet of a push for renewables. 5-10 year price per-megawatt cost trends in the Western US do not support that hypothesis that moving to renewables automatically increases price per-kWh - now I'm not saying that hasn't happened in AUS (it clearly has) but I am saying it doesn't have to be that way and the move to renewables can be cost effective and beneficial - but a lot depends on how it's managed and deployed.
08-01-2018, 10:02 AM
#42
Last time I looked the US was a sovereign nation and as such you have to look at the mix as a whole. Likewise with emissions - the US is the second largest emitter of GHG after China.
You can't ignore the fact that the US accounts for around 15% of all emissions whereas in total the Eu28 account for ~9%. Clearly the US has its work cut out, but given the largest proportion of its emissions is related to electricity production don't you think it would have been smart to cut back on the fossil fuel burning before producing cars that require more electricity which will still disproportionately come from fossil fuels
The power generation on the west coast is probably skewed by hydro, not a bad thing and that would explain the cost there. We have a similar situation with the Snowy mountain scheme and Tasmania (93% hydro). The issues arise when you dont have much in the way of options e.g. solar and wind e.g. intermittent generators, quite different to stable generators like hydro thanks to storage pumping.
You can't ignore the fact that the US accounts for around 15% of all emissions whereas in total the Eu28 account for ~9%. Clearly the US has its work cut out, but given the largest proportion of its emissions is related to electricity production don't you think it would have been smart to cut back on the fossil fuel burning before producing cars that require more electricity which will still disproportionately come from fossil fuels
The power generation on the west coast is probably skewed by hydro, not a bad thing and that would explain the cost there. We have a similar situation with the Snowy mountain scheme and Tasmania (93% hydro). The issues arise when you dont have much in the way of options e.g. solar and wind e.g. intermittent generators, quite different to stable generators like hydro thanks to storage pumping.
08-01-2018, 10:11 AM
#43
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
the US is a sovereign nation but hte grid's are segmented - and you can review production/emissions regionally - and until the current administration the goal was to move to even less - the east coast has a long ways to go but the west is well on it's way and has made significant progress over the past 5-10 years in reducing emissions - are we done yet - no?
the move to EV's is still efficient in that it drops gasoline demand and largely lives in the margin of existing power production - to date I don't think you can show that generation emissions have increased because of a move to EV's - but you can show that those EV's are no longer consuming individual gallons of gasoline - so it's a net win - if/when EV's cause a rise in overall grid demand additional production should be considered for it's impact.
however the following is true:
1. the trends is less fossil fuels - or more efficient/less impact fuels
2. driving an EV uses less fossil fuel net even when the grid is fossil fuel based - power plants are more efficient with fossil fuels than cars and EV's are more efficient than ICE cars
3. driving an EV that is powered by renewables is way better than a gas car - but that's not an option with ICE based cars
and I'd rather have Elon's vision with flawed execution than no plan and no vector that is trying to prove/show we can do things differently - it's how change happens - stability comes from maturity - and we are in EV and Renewal infancy - but that is not a reason to keep doing what we know is causing harm.
the move to EV's is still efficient in that it drops gasoline demand and largely lives in the margin of existing power production - to date I don't think you can show that generation emissions have increased because of a move to EV's - but you can show that those EV's are no longer consuming individual gallons of gasoline - so it's a net win - if/when EV's cause a rise in overall grid demand additional production should be considered for it's impact.
however the following is true:
1. the trends is less fossil fuels - or more efficient/less impact fuels
2. driving an EV uses less fossil fuel net even when the grid is fossil fuel based - power plants are more efficient with fossil fuels than cars and EV's are more efficient than ICE cars
3. driving an EV that is powered by renewables is way better than a gas car - but that's not an option with ICE based cars
and I'd rather have Elon's vision with flawed execution than no plan and no vector that is trying to prove/show we can do things differently - it's how change happens - stability comes from maturity - and we are in EV and Renewal infancy - but that is not a reason to keep doing what we know is causing harm.
08-01-2018, 10:28 AM
#44
I think you give Elon to much credit - theatrics in place of substance. I'm not interested in the politics, I'm interested in the outcome but only one based on sound planning and real costings.
BTW I'm pretty sure the US is well served by what are known as interconnectors - although these may have severe capacity limits imposed on them to ensure network stability (e.g. frequency and load).
BTW I'm pretty sure the US is well served by what are known as interconnectors - although these may have severe capacity limits imposed on them to ensure network stability (e.g. frequency and load).
08-01-2018, 10:35 AM
#45
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
yes the segmented grids can obtain capacity from other grids - but the normal mode of operation is segmented regionally and therefore regional power production mix is a reasonable characteristics to review - also the interconnections flow both ways where sometimes the power comes from cleaner sources flowing into the "dirtier" grids…that certainly happens during the summer in west where there is now surplus solar power being "dumped" east of of the region allowing them to to idle/avoid spinning up dirtier capacity
also when the interconnect flow dirty -> cleaner grid - the extra power from the dirtier source is still fractional vs. the capacity of the segment it's supplementing - while it skews the "mix" of the clean grid to slightly more dirty - you don't get the "full" dirty ratios on to your segment
however it's well documented that driving an EV is more efficient than a gas car even when your grid is dirty
but regionally the west coast mix is less than 50% fossil fuel and the vast majority of that fossil fuel consumption is natural gas which as GHG goes is about as good as you get and way better than individual ICE gas consumption - the segmented grids may take power from other segments but they are designed and operated to meet their regions demands - and given the population density and economic output their move to to renewables and efficient fossil fuels is a dramatic improvement in the overall situation - it's also a working example for the rest of the country that counters the FUD that this whole thing can't work.
none of these argument sway me from the EV challenge - in that the face that portions of the US grid are dirty is not a logical reason to keep driving a gas car - rather it's further justification that we still have work to do and if we are to realize the full benefits of this newer technology it's not a silver bullet in isolation - we need to keep pushing towards as much as possible to clean the grid, day by day, week by week, etc
also when the interconnect flow dirty -> cleaner grid - the extra power from the dirtier source is still fractional vs. the capacity of the segment it's supplementing - while it skews the "mix" of the clean grid to slightly more dirty - you don't get the "full" dirty ratios on to your segment
however it's well documented that driving an EV is more efficient than a gas car even when your grid is dirty
but regionally the west coast mix is less than 50% fossil fuel and the vast majority of that fossil fuel consumption is natural gas which as GHG goes is about as good as you get and way better than individual ICE gas consumption - the segmented grids may take power from other segments but they are designed and operated to meet their regions demands - and given the population density and economic output their move to to renewables and efficient fossil fuels is a dramatic improvement in the overall situation - it's also a working example for the rest of the country that counters the FUD that this whole thing can't work.
none of these argument sway me from the EV challenge - in that the face that portions of the US grid are dirty is not a logical reason to keep driving a gas car - rather it's further justification that we still have work to do and if we are to realize the full benefits of this newer technology it's not a silver bullet in isolation - we need to keep pushing towards as much as possible to clean the grid, day by day, week by week, etc
Last edited by daveo4porsche; 08-01-2018 at 10:54 AM.