Your home for EVs in Rural America
In the last episode, we were in the middle of a conversation with Jason Fee when he needed to attend to some business. We all know what it’s like when Ben breaks his train of thought…
It takes three months (or longer) to get it back on the rails. Here it is; the last part of our discussion with Jason Fee.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Many states are taking steps to get ahead of autonomous commercial vehicles that will eventually be part of everyday life. Kentucky, too, is debating a house bill that will set limitations and guidelines for this emerging technology driven by AI .
While one can debate the pros and cons of AI and the long-term effects on the human race, we agree that there is a need for guidelines and tempered expectations. The truth is, from my perspective, that AI is a beneficial tool, but in the hands of most people, becomes a shortcut to an outcome and will eventually be used for unscrupulous purposes.
Humans are inherently lazy and I am no exception. I have to force myself to do the work to to become better each day. I believe it is a God-given desire inside of me, but I still have to fight the natural urge toward inaction. Also, I don’t believe most people are evil, there are bad people who will prey on others without remorse and AI will make that more prevalent.
That being said, there are wonderful opportunities for AI to improve our lives yet destroy our lives… maybe simultaneously. Creativity is the birthright of humanity and it will be so easy for us to give it away to AI in such a way that it is lost to antiquity. At that point, the human “being” is lost. Without purpose, Man cannot exist. In the words of Viktor Frankl, “When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.” This is where we must learn to live, because the machine has risen.
We Can’t Ignore the Danger. We Must Conquer It. -Optimus Prime
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Can you imagine a EV that you could drive across the US, from sea to shining sea, without having to stop and charge? Now, you’ll have time to check out the World’s Largest Ball of Twine and The Grand Canyon simply because you’re not looking for infrastructure and can focus on the world around you. That’s the promise of the coming future.
We have said numerous times, we are just one breakthrough away (maybe several) from solving the entire clean energy problem for the entire globe. On a smaller, yet related, scale, we are one breakthrough away from higher performance, more efficient electric vehicles with longer ranges and faster charging times.
Currently in Korea at the Pohang University of Science & Technology and at Purdue University here in the U.S., researchers have unlocked 3000 mile battery technology in two different forms.
First, researchers at Pohang, have discovered a way to make battery anodes (where the energy is stored) that hold 10X more charge by using silicon instead of graphite. Using silicon has long been a sought after technology, but until now, the silicon would expand making it unusable. But now, that problem seems to be solved and the potential 3K mile battery is officially a thing.
For me, being the inquisitive person I am, my first question is how long would it take this thing to charge and how many cycles will it last? Okay, technically that’s two questions, but the idea remains. I am assuming, since motors have not improved on efficiency, that this 3K miles would come from a 1000 kWh battery at roughly 3mi/kWh which is what we see from current technology. Charging a battery that size would take a minute… or two.
At 150 kW DCFC, this battery from dead to fully charge would take almost 7 hours. At home, you’re looking at 4 days… just sayin’. That’s how the math works.
Meanwhile, half way around the world, professors and students have built a flow battery that lasts for potentially 3000 miles as well and works more like a traditional “gasoline model”. A flow battery works by using an electrolyte to erode the anode of the battery, freeing those ever-necessary electrons to pass through the electric motor on their way to the cathode. The electrolyte is only good for about 300 mile, but is easily and quickly pumped out of the fuel cell and replaced. The electrolyte is water-based and is recyclable.
At some point though, the anode is used up… But not to worry, it can be replaced as cheaply and easily as your traditional oil change. Now we have an EV that isn’t much different from a traditional ICE model in the way it is refueled. How cool is that?
Either way, both of these technologies are a ways away from making it to market, but it does demonstrate that a lot of smart people are using their intellect for good and not evil. Keep up the good work!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
a·nath·e·ma /əˈnaTHəmə/ noun Something or someone that one vehemently dislikes.
car·math·e·ma /car MATH amuh/ noun The reluctance of people to do basic math regarding EV ownership (which is anathema to me).
Kentucky now has an EV tax in place supposedly to offset waning revenue from the 26 cent per gallon gasoline tax. A spokesman for EvolveKY, an EV advocacy group headquartered in Louisville, said that he was not surprised and that “it needed to come. We need to pay our fair share.” The fee is $120 and will be paid when the car is registered every year (another tax). There is also a 3 cent per kWh tax on public charging to be collected by the station owner and paid to the state monthly.
Make no mistake, any EV owner in Kentucky knew this was an eventuality, but this prompted me to question what exactly is a “fair share”? Turns out that if you do a little math, a flat tax on an EV is comparing apples to oranges with regards to the traditional “use more, pay more” model of the standard gas tax.
A fundamental difference is that the gas tax is “hidden” in the price of a gallon of gasoline. The EV tax smacks you in the face when you renew your tags.
Would traditional drivers change their driving habits if they had to pay their taxes in one lump sum the way EV drivers are now being asked required to?
After examination, I think the way we assess these taxes is inherently flawed, but in reality it all comes down to choice. A Suburban driver is taxed more than a Subaru driver based on fuel efficiency alone, but what you drive is a choice. Toyota Tundra owners know driving a truck is more expensive than driving a Camry. It’s a choice they make based on what they value. I believe it’s worth $120 a year to drive an EV, but that’s my choice.
In my opinion, there is room for improvement for the entire system, but try to find a lawmaker that wants to do the math. The bottom line is that taxes are inevitable, but calling it “fair” is a bit of a stretch.
Let us know what you think?
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
We are back. Welcome to 2024. We recorded this episode on January 22 in the middle of a polar vortex. As you can see, it took me (Ben) a while to get it posted. I do apologize and hope to do better. Every day is an adventure, huh?
In mid-January, our part of the world experienced heavy snow (more than usual anyway) followed by bitter cold. This was true for most of the eastern part of the U.S. and we were greeted by several news stories where Tesla drivers were having trouble charging. Either the car wouldn’t charge or it took extraordinarily long.
To say the least, the tone for most of these was “See? EVs SUCK!”
We try to educate, mostly ourselves, but sometimes it bleeds over to you, our loyal listeners. So, let’s discuss what’s going on and what we can do about it.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Last week, Kentucky announced the first round of National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure grant recipients. Sixteen projects submitted by six entities are now funded with $10.9 million in tax payer dollars. While I agree this is good for EV promotion and adoption, I was a little dismayed when a map of said projects showed an obvious lack of development east of Interstate 75, allowing eastern Kentucky to remain a public infrastructure wasteland.
Admittedly, I’m a bit of a conspiracy theorist only because so many theories have been proven as fact, so my default attitude is distrust and I am looking for ulterior motives especially when it comes to government activity. (I still have no idea who killed JFK, but I do have my suspicions). When the accompanying map showing the location of the projects was unveiled, I immediately began to question why the most rural parts of the state were being overlooked for infrastructure projects, even though I see more EVs on the road in my area daily. I settled on three possible causes: population density, median household income and political ideology. In this episode, we compare rural America and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) states in regards to these causes.
By the U.S. Census Bureau defintion, I don’t live in a rural area as there are more than 2,500 people in the region, BUT I do live in “small-town America” (STA). The population of Laurel County, where Brent and I live, is 62,000+ and we claim the original KFC although its in the next town down. There are fewer potential EV owners here than many “towns”, much less cities, in other states.
The mean annual income is less than a base model Tesla Model 3, another reason not to target this area. Financing over 72 months would require the populous to spend 20% of their pre-tax income on a vehicle. It’s a tough task given the fact that EVs are still proving themselves as a viable alternative, part of which is due to the next reason, political ideology.
Rural America is much more conservative than all of the ZEV states and this is demonstrated by any Red State/Blue State map. We’ve said all along, the environmental movement, including the promotion of electric vehicles, is deemed a Liberal idea and is quickly met with opposition “in these parts.” I think this is stupidity on display, but it is still an obstacle to EV adoption in STA.
Rural Americans deserve the benefits that EVs offer, but I have to remind myself that we are still in the infancy of this movement. Improved infrastructure in STA will come with time. Enjoy our discussion and let us know your thoughts.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Patience is Cumbersome.
That pretty much sums up this entire episode in three words. As we resume our discussion of the road trip recently taken by the Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, the author of the NPR article, Camila Domonoske, makes her arguments for why non-Tesla EVs have a “road trip problem”.
First, she sees planning a road trip as cumbersome. Second, there is a lack of infrastructure, which contributes to the first point. Third, the chargers are not fast enough. And finally, the charging infrastructure is unreliable.
She’s not wrong, but there are several things to consider. We are in the infancy of EV adoption. It seems like we are farther along, but realistically, we are just a toddler attempting the first steps of a marathon long course. JD Powers says that worry about public charging is the number one reason people are hesitant to change to electric. It is a concern, but remember 90% of charging is done at home.
But Ms. Domonoske’s points are valid. We want to go when we want to go and we don’t want anything to slow us down. Look at it this way, walking requires rest breaks, horses need water, cars need to refuel, and EVs will need to charge. As technology advances, this argument will become smaller and smaller, but all forms of travel require us to interrupt our journey at some point. There aren’t enough fast, reliable charging ports available, but that is why there is such a push to build the infrastructure to support a mass fleet of EVs.
The bottom line is this is a process and it requires patience. “Patience is when you’re supposed to be mad, but you choose to understand.” I don’t know who said it, but no truer words have been spoken.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, set out on a whistle stop tour of the south east to promote EVs and EV adoption recently. Embedded in her caravan was an NPR reporter, who, like Madame Secretary, is a long time EV owner. The four day trip covered several stops for town hall style meetings from Charlotte, North Carolina to Memphis, Tennessee. Everything was business as usual, until a local sheriff department outside of Atlanta was called…
Okay, those are the facts of the story and in this episode, we look at what happened. Basically an over-zealous staffer thought he would do Mrs. Granholm a favor and save a charging port for her by ICE-ing out other people waiting to charge. For us, though, the bigger story is a statement made by the reporter, Camila Domonoske; “EVs that aren’t Teslas have a road trip problem…” This is the setup for a longer exploration of this question on the next episode. Ms. Domonoske makes some valid points and offers topics for consideration.
On a side note, Brietbart had a very different take on the story. In fact, after we recorded, they had three articles by three different people on the same story. None of them were positive toward EVs, once again proving that EVs are very political and have become a hot-button buzzword to activate the fringes of both sides of the political spectrum. From a common sense perspective, EVs are very practical but there is a long way to go before they become the first choice for consumers without any coercion. We think EVs will stand on their own merit once the infrastructure is in place and people can see how practical they really are.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
This episode is just a wrap up of EVolveKY’s EV education event hosted in conjunction with the Laurel County Kiwanis Club. There was a bevy of EVs from A to Z (Nissan Ariya to many other Zero emission vehicles.)
Ben and Brent discuss their impressions and take aways from the event.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
A grocery chain in the United Kingdom, Tesco, is pulling thousands of FREE public chargers from several of its locations because of the rising cost of energy. The plan is to eliminate 2,147 FREE ports which is a 38% reduction of the FREE charging available at 600 locations in the UK. That is a 5% drop in the OVERALL public infrastructure in Great Britain.
It sounds to us like Tesco is WalMart with a British accent and we know WalMart hosts several ElectrifyAmerica locations… but they are by no means FREE. Should they be?
Seriously, if WalMart is dedicated to the environment, should we expect free charging? Subsidized charging? How about Volkswagen? IKEA, North America? The US Government?
In America, we have a 1 TRILLION dollar infrastructure spending bill in place with $7.5 BILLION set for public charging. The question is, who is paying for this and who SHOULD be paying for this?
You know we are just guys talking, but let us set aside the mandates and the climate for a moment and discuss the role corporate America should play, the government should play , and each of us will play as EV adoption increases. Enjoy part one of our discussion.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS