E-Democracy builds online public space in the heart of real democracy and community. Our mission is to harness the power of online tools to support participation in public life, strengthen communities, and build democracy.
"An effort to tackle climate change and move away from fossil fuels, the Minnesota Department of Transportation's proposal, released last week, calls for a 3,200 percent increase in the amount of electric vehicles by 2030." (http://tinyurl.com/y3umqtjw)
How can we simultaneously introduce 200,000 new cars while reducing fossil fuel use and not mining whatever comprises these batteries?
Every battery ever built has been a chemical system and thence governed by the laws of chemical thermodynamics. To get an electron to travel an external circuit requires a chemical change at both battery poles and an electron to pass through the electrolyte. What is needed is a completely new and different way to access electricity. Place a solar panel on the roof and hope the sun shines when you need to travel. Or hook your car to a tube that can tap geothermal energy - there is a thermoelectric effect (think thermocouples discovered over a century ago). Imagine a scheme whereby wave and tidal motions can be tapped - very long pipes.
But there is one step to lessen car impact on greenhouse gases - it is to reduce the horsepower capabilities of cars. To start the research go back to the early mass-produced cars, such as the Model T Ford, and ascertain the horsepowers and gas (of the time) consumption. Then track the motive efficiency over the years and hopefully find a hump in the curve. Do we really need 250 horses to get 4 bags of groceries.
Sent from iPad John Ferman Minneapolis, MN
My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and as a result have a severe morale fibre deficiency, so I should not be expected to save the world."
> On Feb 20, 2019, at 9:24 AM, John Gaylord <> wrote: > > How can we simultaneously introduce 200,000 new cars while reducing fossil fuel use and not mining whatever comprises these batteries?
Not really getting John Gaylord’s point, I guess. Setting high goals has always been a good way of moving regulated industries in one direction or another (pretty SOP for all that significantly impact our lives).
The article linked seemed straight forward in identifying plug-in hybrids and fully electric vehicles in the proposal, so only half the 200K vehicles would use any fossil fuel and needn’t given that most if not all power used can be from the electric utility grid or stations independent of it through sustainable sources.
How many new vehicles will be purchased by people in the next two decades in Minnesota? We’ve got over 5.5 million people now. If you figure a million of them will own, lease, or use cars that businesses or guvmit buys and maintains, how unreasonable is the 200K figure? Not very. They might beat it in half the time.
As far as the “not mining for” battery materials, seems like Mr. Gaylord is trying to get the trades to react. Right now aside from the rare fuel cell vehicle, these vehicles use lithium ion battery technology now and we don’t mine that in Minnesota now (DNR is looking into it, though).
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 20, 2019, at 9:24 AM, John Gaylord <<email obscured>> wrote: > > "An effort to tackle climate change and move away from fossil fuels, the Minnesota Department of Transportation's proposal, released last week, calls for a 3,200 percent increase in the amount of electric vehicles by 2030." (http://tinyurl.com/y3umqtjw) > > How can we simultaneously introduce 200,000 new cars while reducing fossil fuel use and not mining whatever comprises these batteries?
Whether electric or gas-powered, self-driving or human-operated, high-horsepower or low- horsepower, the automobile is a dinosaur. The mass-produced automobile is late nineteenth-early 20th century technology. When you reach the point where it costs a lot more to feed your car than to feed your face, including not just the costs of the vehicle, insurance, maintenance, and gas, but also all the costs of the road construction and maintenance, the cops, the ambulances, the hospital emergency rooms, the land acquisition, and the pollution of the air, water and soil, you've got a problem. How much did we spend today just cleaning up the mess from the crashes? There's gotta be a better way to get people to and from here and there.
On 2/20/2019 9:01 PM, Sheldon Gitis wrote: > Whether electric or gas-powered, self-driving or human-operated, high-horsepower or low- horsepower, the automobile is a dinosaur. The mass-produced automobile is late nineteenth-early 20th century technology. When you reach the point where it costs a lot more to feed your car than to feed your face, including not just the costs of the vehicle, insurance, maintenance, and gas, but also all the costs of the road construction and maintenance, the cops, the ambulances, the hospital emergency rooms, the land acquisition, and the pollution of the air, water and soil, you've got a problem. How much did we spend today just cleaning up the mess from the crashes? There's gotta be a better way to get people to and from here and there. = = = = = [KB] What might that be?
Suppose you live in Union Hill*, work in Belle Plaine, and your in-laws live in Jordan. How do you get around?
Or suppose you live in Union Hill, play for the town ball team, and need to get to Perham** to play in a tournament. How do you do it?
In other words, how do people who don't live in a metropolitan area get from here to there and points in between without some kind of car or truck? There isn't mass transit everywhere people live, work, or recreate.
One question I have is the massive infrastructure build out required to support 200k electric vehicles - I assume you need charging stations and other support around the state. That seems like it would present massive logistical problems, one of which would be increased fossil fuel use in the short-term.
Though the raw materials for batteries etc. may not be mined in Minnesota, it seems like a massive increase in batteries would require a commensurate increase in extracting these materials - somewhere.
-------- Original message --------From: MARC ASCH <<email obscured>> Date: 2/21/19 12:53 PM (GMT-06:00) To: <email obscured> Subject: Re: [Minnesota] MnDOT: State should have 194k more electric vehicles in a decade Whether it is electric or combustion, the inputs may differ but you still have to build it. I doubt it will change much.The main change we are seeing is the disappearance of pool chlorine using lithium for fast dissolve due to demand for lithium in cell and car batteries.The charging stations are being built primarily by private industry.Marc Asch 34 N Oaks <email obscured> N Oaks, MN612-386-7800 55127"Democracy is not a spectator sport." Craig S. Wilson
Marc says: "Whether it is electric or combustion, the inputs may differ but you still have to build it. I doubt it will change much."
Yes, but the infrastructure for cars already exists.
Marc says: "The charging stations are being built primarily by private industry."
I did not know that. I skimmed the report and they mention lots and lots of charging stations - at apartments, workplaces, state facilities. This will be expensive, no? What is the incentive for private industry to build charging stations? Especially in rural areas?
If you're one of the very small number who live in Union Hill, and you commute to the metropolis of Belle Plain for work, the early 20th century automobile technology is honky dory. If you're one of the couple million living in the Twin Cities metro area, and you commute 10, 20, 30 miles or more to work or school in another location in the Twin Cities metro area, you're screwed if you have to drive. Maintaining an obsolete transportation system in perpetuity because it works for getting from Union Hill to Belle Plain is absurd.
This is how I694 looked recently on a Sunday afternoon after a 17-vehicle crash. If that's not a picture of an obsolete, broke system, I don't know what is.
I should add, the recently expanded I694. That's 8 lanes of new roadway where that 17-vehicle crash completely shut down all 4 eastbound lanes. The highway expansion also landfilled the entire southern side of the Grass Lake Nature Preserve and resulted in flooding on the north side of the large wetland area.
No, the picture shows what happen when a semi driver over-drives road conditions and jack-knifes. A few close following car drivers were basically trapped. The long pile up of stopped cars is what happens when a road gets closed. Reflect on a similar accident of 150 years ago - a long line of horse carriages awaiting. The picture says nothing about our transportation system mix of semis, trucks, vans, cars. Gitis says the picture proves our system is corrupt, rather I would say it accentuates his gray-matter deficiency.
Sent from iPad John Ferman Minneapolis, MN
My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and as a result have a severe morale fibre deficiency, so I should not be expected to save the world."
> On Feb 23, 2019, at 9:38 AM, Sheldon Gitis <<email obscured>> wrote: > > ― 1 file link ― > > If you're one of the very small number who live in Union Hill, and you commute to the metropolis of Belle Plain for work, the early 20th century automobile technology is honky dory. If you're one of the couple million living in the Twin Cities metro area, and you commute 10, 20, 30 miles or more to work or school in another location in the Twin Cities metro area, you're screwed if you have to drive. Maintaining an obsolete transportation system in perpetuity because it works for getting from Union Hill to Belle Plain is absurd. > > This is how I694 looked recently on a Sunday afternoon after a 17-vehicle crash. If that's not a picture of an obsolete, broke system, I don't know what is. > > http://lillienews.com/articles/2019/02/19/snapshot-depths-winter > > ― 1 file ― > > 📎 694 crash_feb 10.png (1mb) > http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/file/MxJxr6CuWqZYLRdSedxNSyLRwa-5hmF-2Ji54jO/ > > > > Sheldon Gitis > Roseville > About/contact Sheldon Gitis: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/sheldongitis1 > > > Rules: Be civil - No name calling, personal attacks, etc. > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics/charter > Complaints to: <email obscured> > > > ------------------------ > Reply: Reply-All or visit http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6oyhChbhfnWhWFSK1aMbu2
On 2/23/2019 9:38 AM, Sheldon Gitis wrote: > If you're one of the very small number who live in Union Hill, and you commute to the metropolis of Belle Plain for work, the early 20th century automobile technology is honky dory. If you're one of the couple million living in the Twin Cities metro area, and you commute 10, 20, 30 miles or more to work or school in another location in the Twin Cities metro area, you're screwed if you have to drive. Maintaining an obsolete transportation system in perpetuity because it works for getting from Union Hill to Belle Plain is absurd. = = = = = [KB] You're exclusively focused on your own idea and missed my point, even though I wrote, "In other words, how do *people who don't live in a metropolitan area* get from here to there and points in between without some kind of car or truck? There isn't mass transit everywhere people live, work, or recreate."
Union Hill was an *example* of a small town. Pick another one or five, or even a small city like Waseca or Alexandria. There are hundreds of thousands of people living all around Minnesota, away from metropolitan areas, who need a way to get from here to there. They also need to be able to receive goods and services from wherever they're made or based. Goods are like food or snow shovels. Services are like furnace repair or roof replacement or birthing.
Instead of throwing around provocative terms like "dinosaur" and "absurd", give some suggestions that'll solve the problems in the whole state. How do you propose that the people outstate get their groceries, have a broken window replaced, visit their grandchildren, or have their cesspool pumped (*for example*) without motor vehicles or roads?
The subject of this thread is electrifying automobiles with the intent of solving a pollution problem. Whether or not automobiles are obsolete is a different subject altogether.
It is an extreme view to suggest autos will be replaced with another mode of transportation. Ken correctly points out the issue for rural Minnesota, but how would you get from Bloomington to St. Louis Park without a car?
The MNDOT believes our auto fleet should be electrified. It appears the process of electrification has potentially major negative externalities. My question really is - are those externalities worth it for the perceived benefits?
Could you be more specific about your negative externalities? I don’t really see any but positive ones, like reduced greenhouse gas releases, less photochemical smog, less noise, less need to move fuel around, etc.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 23, 2019, at 11:23 AM, John Gaylord <<email obscured>> wrote: > > The MNDOT believes our auto fleet should be electrified. It appears the process of electrification has potentially major negative externalities. My question really is - are those externalities worth it for the perceived benefits?
John, I don't think discussing the “externalities” of putting 200,000 new vehicles on the road makes much sense outside the context of the whole transportation system, of which, those vehicles are a part. If all the existing gas-powered vehicles, and then some, are replaced with electric vehicles, that's probably not going to be a good thing. On the other hand, if for every electric vehicle you put on the road, you took 5 or 10 gas-powered vehicles off the road, I'd go for that. So to answer your question, I am not opposed to all motorized transportation. If I were king, as a near term solution to the mess we now have, I would place large fleets of electric transit vehicles on major thoroughfares like University Avenue in St. Paul, and rather than having many 1000s of vehicles driving from one parking lot to the next, people could leave their cars parked at Target or Walmart or Cub Foods or Menards or wherever, and hop on an electric jitney vehicle providing door-to-door service, and for a very low fare, say a buck a ride, get to their next destination. One electric jitney replacing say 5 gas-powered cars would be a good deal, and far less costly than the billion-dollar train in the middle of the street, or another looney-laned freeway expansion.
Context? That's exactly what the OP is about! Based on the articles like the one linked (http://tinyurl.com/y3umqtjw), it's not surprising that folks only see positive outcomes, since the press seems uninterested in exploring the whole picture.
>From the article: "Part of MnDOT's strategy for increasing electric vehicle adoption is making it easier and more attractive for people to buy them." That's the easy part, just use taxpayer money to reward people for buying electric. (And I didn't see a response to the question "What is the incentive for private industry to build charging stations? Especially in rural areas?")
Building hundreds or thousands of charging stations. Building materials, construction equipment, copper wire, more draw from the electrical grid. Tens of thousands of batteries manufactured, tens of thousands of batteries discarded after their useful life. We can all use Google (http://tinyurl.com/y28p6ccx - I'm not making the case here, just pointing out that there is one.)
The closest the article comes to mentioning a negative is "Electric vehicles are typically more expensive to purchase, but they're cheaper to maintain and their upfront costs will likely decrease as the technology advances." I'm not saying that the negatives outweigh the positives. But ignoring their impact and that of the massive mobilization required raises the probability that it will fail.
(I'm purposely avoiding the debate over validity of arguments about people's willingness to abandon private autos in favor of jitneys, or the state and local mobilization required to implement it. It's just a variation of the same issue.)
And again, what makes you believe there are negative externalities? Name some or provide some other article that discusses them instead of assuming they exist.
I’ve been seeing more and more electric vehicles (the old golf cart types) operating in rural and cabin country over the decades I’ve lived in the state. Many farms have their own fuel facilities and have for nearly a century. It’s expensive. Lots of places may already have charging stations as hybrid farm machinery takes off, just as plug-in hybrids now dominate over the original hybrid automobiles.
This isn’t really a burden as the basic charging stations are not very complex or as expensive as the other two types, and the most expensive fast charging stations pay for themselves in a short time and are still cheaper than gassing up a car for the same distance of travel.
Honestly, it is hard to take any of these threads very seriously when they’re started based on essentially fictional situations dreamed up by folks stuck in a mindset that ignores or denies the realities of practically everything.
In other threads it has been noted that an electric car has full charge range of some 200 miles - that would not get you to Duluth from here. So out in the country there needs to be a charging station. Where are they. How long does it take to charge the battery (high charge rates with severely compromise the battery terminal - its a matter of electro-chemistry) ? Compare that with the time to refuel your car - order of minutes.
At the power levels that farm machinery operate, how large a battery to put out the current level needed. Electrical engineers step in here.
Sent from iPad John Ferman Minneapolis, MN
My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and as a result have a severe morale fibre deficiency, so I should not be expected to save the world."
> On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:56 AM, Bill Kahn <<email obscured>> wrote: > > And again, what makes you believe there are negative externalities? Name some or provide some other article that discusses them instead of assuming they exist. > > I’ve been seeing more and more electric vehicles (the old golf cart types) operating in rural and cabin country over the decades I’ve lived in the state. Many farms have their own fuel facilities and have for nearly a century. It’s expensive. Lots of places may already have charging stations as hybrid farm machinery takes off, just as plug-in hybrids now dominate over the original hybrid automobiles. > > This isn’t really a burden as the basic charging stations are not very complex or as expensive as the other two types, and the most expensive fast charging stations pay for themselves in a short time and are still cheaper than gassing up a car for the same distance of travel.
Bill says: "Honestly, it is hard to take any of these threads very seriously when they’re started based on essentially fictional situations dreamed up by folks stuck in a mindset that ignores or denies the realities of practically everything."
Tesla's now have 400 mile ranges. Search YouTube for Tesla battery swap. You can do a full battery swap on 2 Teslas in the time it takes to fill a BMW 7 series.Marc Asch 34 N Oaks <email obscured> N Oaks, MN612-386-7800 55127"Democracy is not a spectator sport." Craig S. Wilson
-------- Original message --------From: John Ferman <<email obscured>> Date: 2/24/19 12:51 PM (GMT-06:00) To: Forum MN Politics <mn-politics@forums.e-democracy.org> Subject: Re: [Minnesota] MnDOT: State should have 194k more electric vehicles in a decade In other threads it has been noted that an electric car has full charge range of some 200 miles - that would not get you to Duluth from here. So out in the country there needs to be a charging station. Where are they. How long does it take to charge the battery (high charge rates with severely compromise the battery terminal - its a matter of electro-chemistry) ? Compare that with the time to refuel your car - order of minutes.At the power levels that farm machinery operate, how large a battery to put out the current level needed. Electrical engineers step in here.Sent from iPadJohn FermanMinneapolis, MNMy doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland and as a result have a severe morale fibre deficiency, so I should not be expected to save the world."> On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:56 AM, Bill Kahn <<email obscured>> wrote:> > And again, what makes you believe there are negative externalities? Name some or provide some other article that discusses them instead of assuming they exist.> > I’ve been seeing more and more electric vehicles (the old golf cart types) operating in rural and cabin country over the decades I’ve lived in the state. Many farms have their own fuel facilities and have for nearly a century. It’s expensive. Lots of places may already have charging stations as hybrid farm machinery takes off, just as plug-in hybrids now dominate over the original hybrid automobiles.> > This isn’t really a burden as the basic charging stations are not very complex or as expensive as the other two types, and the most expensive fast charging stations pay for themselves in a short time and are still cheaper than gassing up a car for the same distance of travel.> > > Jack FermanKingfield, MinneapolisAbout/contact Jack Ferman: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/johnfermanRules: Be civil - No name calling, personal attacks, etc. http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics/charterComplaints to: <email obscured>------------------------ Reply: Reply-All or visit http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2lUkb11XlbSJaE9OYSsYGR New Topic: mn-politics@forums.e-democracy.org Digest: Subject: digest on Leave: Subject: unsubscribe Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politicsHelp? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting: http://OnlineGroups.Net
Tesla will no doubt be a big part of the transition and already has their SuperCharger locations along our Interstates and in Brainerd, though most are in the Metro area; they are all over the country and will become denser as their sales increase, no doubt. It takes 30 minutes to fully charge a Tesla at these stations. Tesla’s into trucking too, so I think some of those stations are part of truck stops (Iowa’s dealing with this as well, with some disputes with electric utilities to be worked out).
> On Feb 24, 2019, at 1:41 PM, MARC ASCH <<email obscured>> wrote: > > Tesla's now have 400 mile ranges. Search YouTube for Tesla battery swap. You can do a full battery swap on 2 Teslas in the time it takes to fill a BMW 7 series.Marc Asch