Gas $4 this summer

[Hamlet]

Base load plants aren't typically run at less than full capacity. They are generally running at full power if they aren't down for maintenance or repairs.

It doesn't pay to build more base load power than needed. Most of the time all of the available coal plants will be running full speed and they will have an intermediate load plant running to cover variability in the demand. Here is an example from Wisconsin (look at Fig 1 on page 3)--

http://psc.wi.gov/thelibrary/publications/electric/electric04.pdf

There is almost always some power being produced beyond the base load. In the winter it is just the intermediate load plants, and then in the summer they add peakers as well.

Note this quote--

"Base load plants operate almost continuously (approximately 70 to 80 percent of the time), except when down for scheduled maintenance, repairs, or unplanned outages. They take a long time to ramp back up to full capacity and have limited to noability to vary their output of electricity."

They don't just feed more coal into a plant when demand picks up. They are always trying to feed the coal in at full speed.

I don't think your explanation holds water.

On the plus side for EVs, most of them would be charged overnight which is not a peak time. So the impact on the infrastructure is minimal, you don't need more/thicker wires to each neighborhood, those are already sized for daytime/AC peaks. So at night, they are not using 'peaker' plants at all - they rely on the baseline (coal, nukes and some hydro - mostly coal). But they would need to feed more coal to those plants to provide a higher average power at night.

It doesn't take more coal plants, it just takes feeding the existing plants more coal at night. If I were the owner/manager of a power plant, there is nothing I would like more than increasing consumption during non-peak hours. That's where the money is. Just some incremental fuel costs on all that expensive infrastructure. I can smell the money!

-ERD50

 

[Midpack]

On the plus side for EVs, most of them would be charged overnight which is not a peak time. So the impact on the infrastructure is minimal, you don't need more/thicker wires to each neighborhood, those are already sized for daytime/AC peaks.
-ERD50

Agreed this would be ideal to avoid (peak) power generation issues. But why do we read article after article stating one of the big barriers to broader acceptance of EV's is the lack of charging stations (other than at EV owners homes)? Puzzling...

 

[REWahoo]

But why do we read article after article stating one of the big barriers to broader acceptance of EV's is the lack of charging stations (other than at EV owners homes)? Puzzling...

I think it is because of their limited range. When I was working I had a 25 mile commute each way. As I understand the capabilities of most non-hybrid EV's today, I'd need a charging station at work unless I planned on sleeping in the office - or somewhere along the side of the road.

 

[Midpack]

I think it is because of their limited range. When I was working I had a 25 mile commute each way. As I understand the capabilities of most non-hybrid EV's today, I'd need a charging station at work unless I planned on sleeping in the office - or somewhere along the side of the road.

That would be my interpretation too, but we're going in circles?

If those vehicles are all charged after 10 p.m., when electricity demand is low, the nation would require no additional power generation. Then again, if all owners charged their cars at 5 p.m., up to 160 new large power plants would be necessary.

On the plus side for EVs, most of them would be charged overnight which is not a peak time. So the impact on the infrastructure is minimal, you don't need more/thicker wires to each neighborhood, those are already sized for daytime/AC peaks.

It doesn't pay to build more base load power than needed.

 

[REWahoo]

That would be my interpretation too, but we're going in circles?

Isn't a commute a circular route?

What we really need is an affordable EV with decent range. Obviously much easier said than done.

 

[jeffmete]

Personally, I will be continuing to drive my new pickup with abandon this summer regardless of gas prices. I will be towing the camper wherever I damn well plase as well.

I'm with you. I just bought a 2012 Mustang GT with 412 HP. THough I do see 24 mpg on long trips and 19-20 around town. Its interesting to read all the choices people make. If I was truly trying to be green and save gas, I'd buy a 10 year old civic for $5K and put the difference between that money and the cost of a Prius in the bank to pay for gas for the rest of my life. Paying 35K for an electric vehicle to save $100 or $200/month in gas is hard to fathom. Especially if you still need a IC vehicle for trips anyway.

 

[Mulligan]

I'm with you. I just bought a 2012 Mustang GT with 412 HP. THough I do see 24 mpg on long trips and 19-20 around town. Its interesting to read all the choices people make. If I was truly trying to be green and save gas, I'd buy a 10 year old civic for $5K and put the difference between that money and the cost of a Prius in the bank to pay for gas for the rest of my life. Paying 35K for an electric vehicle to save $100 or $200/month in gas is hard to fathom. Especially if you still need a IC vehicle for trips anyway.

Im with you. Its not like I am anti environment and throw candy wrappers out my car window, but going green in the truest since will have to be justified by my pocketbook before I can ever join. However, I will strongly consider my next vehicle to have better mpg though, will does help reduce the footprint.

 

[HFWR]

My pickup got 15mpg in town, and maybe 20 on the highway. I kept it for 11.5 years, and traded for a Prius. Granted, I paid some premium over other puddle jumpers, but even the most fuel-efficient ICE cars didn't get that good of mileage in town, which is where most of my driving occurs. So, I use less than a third the fuel the old pickup used, which may or may not pan out over the next ten years or so that I own the thing, depending on what fuel prices do...

 

[explanade]

My commute is a mile with 2 or 3 traffic lights, a couple of stop signs.

When I researched cars more than 5 years ago, I ruled out hybrids because for short trips, I wasn't going to get enough regenerative breaking to charge up the hybrid so I'd be running on gas most of the time.

So I went with a Civic which was rated ilk 27 or 28 city. I'm getting more like 20 MPG, I would guess.

I could probably make an EV work for my commutes but I'd be paying around $40k and I wouldn't be able to drive out of town? I can afford it but it would have to be a second car in that case and I'd have to have an ICE car to drive up to San Francisco say, which is about 50 miles away.

Lot of expense to be green for the daily commute but to have two cars instead of one, the green-ness evaporates.

 

[Texas Proud]

My commute is a mile with 2 or 3 traffic lights, a couple of stop signs.

When I researched cars more than 5 years ago, I ruled out hybrids because for short trips, I wasn't going to get enough regenerative breaking to charge up the hybrid so I'd be running on gas most of the time.

So I went with a Civic which was rated ilk 27 or 28 city. I'm getting more like 20 MPG, I would guess.

I could probably make an EV work for my commutes but I'd be paying around $40k and I wouldn't be able to drive out of town? I can afford it but it would have to be a second car in that case and I'd have to have an ICE car to drive up to San Francisco say, which is about 50 miles away.

Lot of expense to be green for the daily commute but to have two cars instead of one, the green-ness evaporates.

You have found one of the problems with the gas mileage figures.... short trips where you do not get up to temp...

We have a Hyundai Elantra and I am surprised when I look at the gas mileage and my wife is getting 20 to 22... and I get 28 to 30... but she usually goes to the school to pick up the kids, to the store for food etc. and rarely gets it up to temp. When she drives a ways it does go up to the 30 and even 33 at times...

 

[Alan]

I think it is because of their limited range. When I was working I had a 25 mile commute each way. As I understand the capabilities of most non-hybrid EV's today, I'd need a charging station at work unless I planned on sleeping in the office - or somewhere along the side of the road.

I heard that Google's offices (in Seattle?) have a multi-story car park with charging stations powered from solar panels. Not many companies are going to go to those lengths, so I agree that range is a big issue.

 

[travelover]

I heard that Google's offices (in Seattle?) have a multi-story car park with charging stations powered from solar panels. Not many companies are going to go to those lengths, so I agree that range is a big issue.

Check out the aerial view

Google's Solar Example | Get Solar.com

 

[explanade]

Would solar panels be a good idea in Seattle?

Actually the best thing they do is they have a fleet of buses giving free commute rides to their employees all over the Bay Area. There is Wifi on those buses.

Apple does the same thing.

 

[W2R]

We had free commuting vans at our work, provided by the state. If enough people were interested, an additional one was provided until there were enough.

I just lived a mile and a half from work, so wasn't interested - - most of the vanpools went to the north shore of Lake Ponchartrain. I understand that the vanpools provided some quality napping time while commuting.

 

[Alan]

Check out the aerial view

Google's Solar Example | Get Solar.com

Thanks for the link, that's pretty good to see.

Would solar panels be a good idea in Seattle?

We spent 7 months in N. Yorkshire last year and were surprised at how many houses we saw with solar panels. I'm sure it is just as wet and cloudy as Seattle plus it is a lot further north. (the mostly southerly spot in the UK is still further north than the most northerly place in mainland USA).

You got me thinking, so a quick search shows this:

At the end of 2011, there were 230,000 solar power projects in the United Kingdom,[1] with a total installed generating capacity of 750 megawatts (MW).[2] By February 2012 the installed capacity had reached 1,000 MW.[3] Solar power use has increased very rapidly in recent years, albeit from a small base, as a result of reductions in the cost of photovoltaic (PV) panels, and the introduction of a Feed-in tariff (FIT) subsidy in April 2010.[1] In 2012, the government said that 4 million homes across the UK will be powered by the sun within eight years,[4] representing 22,000 MW of installed solar power capacity by 2020.[1]

 

[explanade]

I know even Germany uses solar panels. They even had a home which could be rotated to maximize exposure to the sun throughout the day.

Better than nothing I suppose but when they typically talk about big solar projects, it usually involves the Southwest. There's a lot of empty desert in AZ which could be used not just for PV projects but for harnessing the heat to turn steam turbines.