Solar, Wind and Battery Power Discussion

[level1]

@DastardlyMuffin

The fuel is stupidly easy to create. Btw, whoever was throwing around that early math about flaxseed is off. One acre of flaxseed can produce upwards of 250 gallons of biofuel. Not accounting the ethanol.

When I demolished your ridiculous assertion that you could run two trucks off a half-acre of flax I cited seven (7) different sources and used simple math that even a primary school kid could follow. If I have made some error or omission in the math, please let me know exactly where, and provide a reference for the correct value or method.

As long as you keep making assertions that are not backed up by anything, it is impossible to take you seriously.

Producing biofuel from grains like flax can be conceptually straight-forward, but you need vast amounts of land to produce the fuel in the quantities needed… and when you have to farm that amount of land you aren’t going to do with with a scythe and a seed press in an afternoon — you need machinery worth hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars — something you seem happy to overlook. At that point it is no longer viable to produce at the scale you are talking about.

There is a big difference between producing a cup-full of biofuel in a one-off experiment, and producing 1,536 gallons per year, as you would need to do. Just because you can do one does not mean that you can do the other.

The only people producing biofuel from grain the in the US are small religious communities (who don’t drive cars), and large companies who are exploiting the subsidy scheme offered by the government. Small-scale biofuel production from flax simply isn’t economically viable. You don’t qualify for the subsidy scheme at that scale. You are financially better off just buying dinosaur juice.

…and that’s why no-one does it.

[DastardlyMuffin]

@level1

When I demolished your ridiculous assertion

You demolished nothing. There’s no penetrating that thick echo chamber you reside in.

@level1

1,536 gallons per year, as you would need to do

For two vehicles? Good lord! Your math is staring you straight in the face… even if you needed that much fuel for two medium duty engines, that’s a massive surplus unless you’re a delivery driver.

• gassification
• flaxseed
• algae
• waste produce from farming

you’d have another massive surplus of feedstock for producing fuel all without an oil well on your acre.

combine it with diesel hybrids like the post mentioned above and your fuel usage is minimal

by the way, I don’t need to spend my entire day finding little articles to prove basic math and logistics to you. It’s redundant.

I think a diesel hybrid is the sweet spot for both the ability to haul heavier renewable lead acid batteries that you can service while also being able to rely on excess solar (like a fully electric mode)

also, the argument for inefficiencies with farming yields can be met with modern farming practices like gravity gardening, underground geothermal farming like they do in remote regions of alaska, and hydroponics. The effort just isn’t there

If it really comes down to you just disliking the mechanic culture and carelessness that surrounds it I’m right there with you. I think the automotive industry could be redesigned and made more practical. Like it’s absurd that every engine model needs an entire factory dedicated to producing specialized parts when there should be a universal standard. It would reduce so much plastic waste

At least all the tires in the U.S. use a schrader valve

[level1]

@DastardlyMuffin

Dude. Are you capable of not being egotistical and rude?

There’s no need to be polite when dealing with a trolling attempt. Follow the bouncing ball with me for a moment as I walk through the post I was replying to…

@LeeTalbert

My job has nowhere to charge EVs

Translation: “I can’t charge an EV at work.”

if I do it at home the charge cable will get stolen within the first two days.

Translation: “I can’t charge an EV at home.”

The nearest charging station to my house is about 10 miles away, and not actually near any stores I would go to, especially not twice weekly.

Translation: “I can’t charge an EV anywhere nearby.”

If you can’t charge an EV at work, home or nearby then you can’t charge an EV — period. And if you can’t charge an EV then there’s no point having one. That should be utterly, blindingly obvious to anyone.

But then we get:

How feasible would it be for me to switch to an EV?

That is textbook Trolling 101. Scope the discussion in such a way as to make it impossible for anyone to logically argue FOR getting an EV, then grab the popcorn and watch while they waste their time trying.

As if all of the above didn’t make it obvious that Lee was trolling… previously, in this very thread:

@LeeTalbert

I used to have a prius

He used to have a Prius. In case you don’t know, a Prius is a Hybrid EV. He already had an EV.

Summary: If anything Lee said was remotely true, he would already know the answer. If you already know the answer there is no point in asking the question. If you ask the question, then you have an ulterior motive for doing so.

Leaping to the defence of someone you think is under attack is admirable, but you shouldn’t blindly leap. Suppress the knee-jerk reaction. Think first.

PS: Lee’s posting history clearly indicates that he does not troll on a regular basis. But it is common for folks to engage in some light-hearted trolling every now and again — for funsies. If you recognise the trolling for what it is, then an in-kind response is appropriate. No-one should take such exchanges seriously, however, because it’s basically just banter. Colourful language and emoticons should make that obvious. FYI: This is an emoticon:

[level1]

@DastardlyMuffin

@level1

1,536 gallons per year, as you would need to do

For two vehicles? Good lord! Your math is staring you straight in the face… even if you needed that much fuel for two medium duty engines, that’s a massive surplus unless you’re a delivery driver.

Because you did not provide any information about how far you drive your vehicles, I used (and cited) the average US driver, who drives 13,596 miles per year. Two vehicles suggests two drivers which means the total distance driven is 2 * 13596 = 27,192 miles.

Average fuel efficiency for a light truck is 17.8 mpg (also cited). That means you need 27192 / 17.8 = 1,527 gallons of biofuel.

Two steps of elementary mathematics. Nothing to do with “my opinion”. It’s just math. Can you spot a flaw anywhere? Because, if you can’t, then you aren’t arguing with me… you are arguing with math.

If you tell us how far your two vehicles are driven each year, I can do the math again for you. But really, you should be able to do it yourself. It’s not hard.

Fuel Needed (g) = Distance Driven (m) / 17.8

If you actually know the average fuel efficiency value for your vehicles, use that instead:

Fuel Needed (g) = Distance Driven (m) / Fuel Efficiency (mpg)

( Mea culpa: 1536 was due to rounding error. Not that it makes any functional difference. You still need over 1500 gallons of biofuel per year assuming the trucks are driven an average amount. )

@DastardlyMuffin

by the way, I don’t need to spend my entire day finding little articles to prove basic math and logistics to you. It’s redundant.

I am the one doing (and showing) basic math. You, however, are merely asserting that certain numbers are true, without providing any math at all, nor even referencing where your numbers come from.

Everyone is entitled to opinions, but you can’t just jump into a forum thread, state a bunch of things that don’t match reality, and expect to get away with it. Folks who are prepared to do research and math are going to challenge you. The way that you deal with the challenge is to cite your sources and show your working.

I know that “confident bullshitting” is as American as apple pie, but this forum has an international membership… and the rest of the world isn’t as enamoured with confident bullshit as you guys seem to be. We prefer facts and data. We value opinions that are backed up. So, rather than get upset that people aren’t agreeing with you, just put in a tiny, tiny amount of effort to show that you aren’t just making stuff up.

[DastardlyMuffin]

@level1

I know that “confident bullshitting” is as American as apple pie

You just described yourself buddy.

Every new person to come to this thread is going to enjoy being belittled and called poor by you for not chearleading EV’s and crapping all over anything, absolutely anything alternative.

I think you own an EV and you’re butthurt to think at any point your investment might have been a waste

At this point I refuse to bother doing any math because I know you won’t budge. You’re the troll here.

[level1]

Rather than just engage in personal attacks, please get back to the topic.

I had just shown you the math that demonstrated that a large amount of biofuel is needed to power two light trucks.

You now need to either point out the flaw in the math, or accept that it is true, and respond with something like “Oopsies, looks like I was wrong. Trucks need a lot more biofuel than I guessed. Turns out to not be as practical as I thought. Sorry for wasting your time.”

[DastardlyMuffin]

@level1

You now need to

I don’t need to do anything. Go use A.I., the average vehicle is not a V8 gas truck, it’s a car getting 30-45 mpg. 60-70mpg if it’s a hybrid. More with a diesel hybrid.

Don’t talk to me like a toddler. It’s no way to motivate me

[level1]

@DastardlyMuffin

the average vehicle is not a V8 gas truck, it’s a car getting 30-45 mpg. 60-70mpg if it’s a hybrid. More with a diesel hybrid

The US government site I cited (Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data - Average Fuel Economy by Major Vehicle Category) simply classifies them as “Light Truck/Van” and has worked out the average to be 17.8 mpg. They are averages. Averages. So “The average US ‘truck’ gets 17.8mpg.”

Cars are an entirely different category, with their own (higher) average fuel efficiency. Trucks are not cars. You were not talking about cars before, so don’t try to blur the lines by talking about cars now. You own trucks. You claims were about trucks.

Now, your particular trucks may not be average, they might get better fuel economy. Or they might get worse. We don’t know, because you’re not telling us. It is highly likely, however, that your trucks aren’t too far from the average.

Based on the average, your math and “half-acre” assertion was out by a factor of 60. Even if, somehow, your trucks manage to get twice the average, then it still means your assertion is out by a factor of 30. Not 30%, 30x — 3,000%.

For your “half-acre” assertion to be correct, your trucks would need to be getting 60x the average fuel economy of a US Light Truck. That’s 60 * 17.8 = 1,068 mpg. 1,068 mpg! I know that painting them red can make them go faster, but I don’t think that even you can claim that your trucks get 1,068 mpg.

What that means, quite simply, is that you are wrong. Not by a small amount, but by a lot. There is no remotely believable fuel economy figure that your trucks can achieve that would make it possible for them to be fuelled from a half-acre of flax.

That. Is. Reality.

Biofuels are nice in theory, very warm and fuzzy to think about, and I personally wished that they made sense (at scale), but they don’t. Because. Simple. Math.

Please don’t dig your heels in on this. It’s not a hill you want to die on. We all make mistakes. Just accept that you have made one and move on. Lots of alternative fuels might make sense in some use cases (like green hydrogen) so how about you discuss those, rather than digging yourself into a deeper hole on this one.

PS: I have work to do up north. I look forward to reading your well-researched, referenced and mathematically sound opinions on alternative fuels when I come back at the end of the week. Cheerio!

[LeeTalbert]

I’m going to overlook where I was called a troll. The point was that EVs are not viable for a large number of people. Charging infrastructure is nowhere near as robust as petroleum infrastructure, blame government and big oil. So EVs may be the future, but it is a very distant future for many. Hybrids are the perfect stepping stone. Much more efficient that fully gasoline cars, but can be refueled almost anywhere and charge themselves.

[raisinsfried]

I would say EV are probably viable for the majority of Americans to own at least one, if they could get past their idea that they need a luxury truck to show off to the neighbors, no reason the F-150 should be the best selling car or has been.

Cities need to mandate any home with a garage should have a 240v outlet in the right spot to be a EVSE. As well as a certain % of mandatory parking needs chargers for residential buildings.

The move to electric does not all need to be cars either, my city has mandatory bike parking for the last decade, I wish E-Bikes all had a standardized charger and places could start offering that. USB-C PD would honestly work for most.

Really as far as the charging network the CCS network seems nearly there, if you are stuck on Tesla you really couldn’t use one if you had to visit rural areas of the state ever. The route I take to my grandmothers in winter during colder days could be a bit sketchy if the 1 charger on the route is down. If she had a Level 2 charger at her house it would be fine. Though for 99% of the year it would be fine. Plus on really snowy cold days like that even in an ICE vehicle i probably wouldn’t take the trip.

Sure there is route planning, but that is not that new in more rural areas you have to know what towns have gas stations, and what gas stations are open after dark.

Ionna has built a few new stations here in Kansas already, closing gaps. They plan to put in 30k charging points by 2030 and so far it looks like they might hit that number.

Plus for people really worried about it the norm is to own 2 cars per household at least often a car per adult in the household. Can easily leave one as ICE for a roadtrip vehicle.

[wertigon]

@LeeTalbert

The point was that EVs are not viable for a large number of people

Oh, absolutely. This is true. There is a percentage of USA residents (and remember, 1% of those are still 3 million people, nothing to sneeze at) that, at the moment, would find it very inconvenient to own an EV.

Here is the thing though:

1. Charging infrastructure in the US is expanded every day. Yes, even under Trump.

EV Fast Charging Trends Improve in Q1 2025

2. Gas stations are shutting everywhere in the US as customers switch to EVs. Rural US will be the first to make the transition, as the first gas stations to die will be those outside the main routes and cities. The next sign will be when cities start consolidating their gas stations - used to be three stations now there is one, bigger one where my dad lives. Once you need to drive 15 miles just to reach a gas station, an EV will be looking more tempting.

Why the death of gas stations will be sooner than you think | EnPowered

3. Charging on the street will soon be coming to a city near you. Whether it is adding an EV plug to a lamp post, or the local walmart installing a charging spot, more and more ways of getting juice into your EV will come. Right now, it makes most sense if you have a house and driveway, and even more sense if that house also has Solar Panels. But even if you live in an apartment, EV charging will soon be viable in your neighborhood - if it isn’t already.

This is how it will be tomorrow, though. Not today. So while I can certainly buy the argument that currently, a large group of US residents, 5%-10% or so cannot get an EV right this very instant… It’s not hard to see where this is going.

Back in 2010 I made the prediction that by 2015, everyone would own a Smartphone. This was when Nokia was at it’s peak. The same type of forces are now converging, so it’s a pretty safe bet to say that by 2040, most US citizens will drive an EV. Despite Trumps best efforts to sabotage the US Automakers (leading to Chinese ownership of the US brands).

[SgtAwesomesauce]

@wertigon

Well, yes and no - Real world use shows that 200Wh per kg is enough for a 200 mile car, in general terms. Sodium batteries can handle that and have a lot less problem with flammability than Lithium batteries.

I’m very excited to see sodium batteries become mainstream in EVs. The ignition issues is a real fear, if unwarranted, for many people who haven’t yet adopted. GM’s Bolt issue didn’t help that at all.

I think the big issue I have with EV range comes from my experiences driving one in cold weather. When it’s -5c out, the range decreases and my trip from Utah back home had me cutting it pretty close, even with the Supercharger network, just because of one corridor where it’s like 150mi between trips.

@wertigon

Meanwhile, we are seeing two other interesting developments, the first is that solid state batteries are starting to roll out the assembly lines, with 500 Wh/kg. The second is 1MW chargers rolling out that can charge your car with 300 miles of range in 2 minutes or so. So, watch the space

I think this is the other thing that I’m excited for. EVs are like 80% there in terms of charge speed. I’m fairly satisfied with what my car delivers, but when you think about charge curves, you can keep the charge rate high for more miles with higher density batteries, and that’s the key, right? It’s not so much about total capacity from 100% for me, but about functional charge speed 10% → 60%, which is realistically the sharp taper point for many EVs.

So the way I see it, if we can get 600 mile EVs as a standard, we can keep that 300kW+ charge rate for like 150 miles, and that’ll really really improve the public perception of them.

My reasoning for all of this is that I’m no longer convinced that large vehicles are the ideal transport system for urban areas where your standard trip is <15 miles. In that circumstance, ebikes are far better. I just did a conversion of my mountain bike and it’s so much nicer to ride long distances, owing to my poor cardio conditioning

---

What I’d really like though, is to see some EVs take a more privacy-oriented perspective. If an EV came out that for sub 50k and gave me ~300 miles of range, reasonable trunk space and had a manufacturer supported option to not phone home, I’d be all over it. I know you can remove the SIM from most of them, but I feel like that comes with it’s own problems… I digress, this is somewhat off-topic…

[SgtAwesomesauce]

@wertigon

Charging on the street will soon be coming to a city near you. Whether it is adding an EV plug to a lamp post, or the local walmart installing a charging spot, more and more ways of getting juice into your EV will come. Right now, it makes most sense if you have a house and driveway, and even more sense if that house also has Solar Panels. But even if you live in an apartment, EV charging will soon be viable in your neighborhood - if it isn’t already.

I saw something recently; forget if it was concept or actual implementation of a L2 charging point that’s installed inside the curb. Has the euro style of Bring Your Own Cable, because obviously coiling cables on the curb isn’t a realistic option, but I thought it was pretty cool. Though, charge points in lamp posts is probably far better.

[rcxb]

@DastardlyMuffin

Someone stealing cable for profit just wants the copper and probably have protective measures or know where to cut

Just how many news articles about people being killed while trying to steal copper would you like me to point you to? I think I can manage a few hundred…

[GoldenAngel1997]

The fact regular people [still] try that, ventures towards alarming

[LeeTalbert]

Power lines like the one in that photo are anywhere from 1000 to 70000 volts. That is very different than the 110/220 that actually enters homes.

[DastardlyMuffin]

This thread is full of trolls gaslighting newcomers. Super obvious. I’ll see myself out, if you keep replying to me I’ll put you on ignore.

Thank you

[GoldenAngel1997]

I just used image for reference- but premise still stands, of people trying to pilfer off live wires

[LeeTalbert]

Bolt cutters with rubber grips can cut through large cables and still protect you from a 220v arc, plus most tools like that have fiberglass handles. But there are still some low IQ crack addicts that will try it with small, steel-handled wire cutters.