←back to thread

65 points doener | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
anovikov ◴[] No.45345257[source]
Too little and too late. Draconian measures are necessary to push automakers into compliance and to push consumers to buy. It's expensive unless we want to sell out to China completely, but necessary and in the end, affordable.
replies(8): >>45345279 #>>45345423 #>>45345594 #>>45345617 #>>45345664 #>>45345827 #>>45346002 #>>45346289 #
storus ◴[] No.45346002[source]
Electric grid is incapable of 1:1 switching to EVs from gas/diesel vehicles. If you want to collapse economy, just enforce it with your draconian measures.
replies(2): >>45346111 #>>45346189 #
ViewTrick1002 ◴[] No.45346111[source]
Not sure why this old talking points keeps being repeated?

BEVs are like the best consumers imaginable for our grids. Their owners get hourly contracts and perfectly time their charging when the prices are low helping stabilize the grid.

Some even grid companies even support adding cars charging to the ancillary markets further increasing grid reliability - while also paying the BEV owners for their service.

Taking in the supply chain from producing oil, refining it and transporting it the change in electricity consumption is negigible because especially the refining step is quite electricity intensive.

But if no refining happens in a market then something like a 20-30% increase in electricity usage is expected.

Please do tell me how that entails a "collapse"?

replies(1): >>45346208 #
storus ◴[] No.45346208[source]
Because it's true. Most EU countries aren't built to have 100% EV. Not every country is Norway. Spanish or Czech grids collapse from hot weather already, how much worse would it be when you suddenly plug millions of vehicles? With 220V one would need 1-2 days to fully charge continuously to get to 100% depending on battery size; perfect timing is a wishful thinking, you'd get peak charging times as well. Speed chargers are very few and their price is now approaching gas prices already, and electric grid can't bear many of them anyway.
replies(3): >>45346230 #>>45346951 #>>45349658 #
seec ◴[] No.45349658[source]
I wouldn't bother arguing with him.

He is an anti-nuclear troll, randomly posting nonsense about nuclear everywhere he goes. It's always emotionally driven bullshit, crafted to create a reaction.

Just google his pseudo. I wouldn't be surprised if he was sponsored by a foreign agency to destabilize political discourse. Considering he is from Sweden, the potential of Russian influence isn't negligible.

In any case, whatever he says, is at best, extremely idealistic and based on wishful thinking about the true capabilities of renewables (we are still waiting on reliable and cost-effective storage, if that's even possible at scale for European weather patterns).

replies(1): >>45352371 #
1. ViewTrick1002 ◴[] No.45352371[source]
Please do tell me where I am wrong. I love how someone coming with the near scientific consensus on the cheapest and fastest path to a green economy is branded as a "russian troll".

You truly are completely out of your depth here. As evidenced by your previous attempt [1] where you didn't know that China so far has finished 0 reactors in 2025.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45279399#45349448

replies(1): >>45362499 #
2. tclancy ◴[] No.45362499[source]
I mean, you did just out your sock puppet, but sure.
replies(1): >>45363816 #
3. ViewTrick1002 ◴[] No.45363816[source]
Which account is my sock puppet?