Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 1) 176

by evilviper (#47731885) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

In quite a lot of Europe you simply cannot do that without substantial changes to a lot of things, which is why EV's and hybrids have quite some way to go yet.

Actually, it sounds like Europe has "quite some way to go yet."

If EVs continue to develop, and become cost-effective, they will be widely adopted, and it will be Europe that lags behind and at a disadvantage, not EVs.

Comment: Re:And how long does it take... (Score 1) 176

by evilviper (#47731821) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

you can often legally store a drum of diesel

You're still getting your fuel at a station, you're just batching the process into fewer trips and higher up-front costs.

The in-home alternative would be to have home heating-oil deliveries, which you (illegally) use to power your truck.

You can make your own biodiesel

No, I'm pretty sure I can't... I don't have vegetable oil lines coming into my house, so I'm no better off.

Comment: Re:And how long does it take... (Score 1) 176

by evilviper (#47731771) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

as a workplace who wants to support plug-in EVs is that, in doing so, you are becoming a refueler-- a gas station. You're entering another business with costs, time demands, enforcement requirements, and drama.

You could... OR you could hire a company, let them lease the space from you, and leave them to own the equipment, manage/police the equipment and the users/customers.

Oh, and plug in EVs aren't zero emissions. We're still on the hook for the power generation emissions that result from the electricity demand.

That depends on your locale. Some areas have lots of cheap hydro-power. Some areas have lots of nuclear power. Some have lots of wind, and a few have lots of solar.

Finally, there's a major equity issues. The vast majority of EV buyers are rich

That was true of automobiles at the start, too. In fact, that's probably true of damn-near any early adopter. If you think about it, those rich people are subsidizing the R&D, and will be lowering the cost for those who come after, including, eventually, the poor.

The low-income population by and large lives in apartments whose landlords are not even considering installing EV chargers.

This is a "city" problem, rather than a rich/poor problem. I've lived in plenty of apartments, where my car parked a short distance from at least one of my windows, and it would have been no trouble for me to run an extension cord out to my vehicle.

In a high-rent area, where apartments are high-rises, that becomes more difficult. But honestly, ANYBODY who can afford to live in those high rent areas, even in an apartment, is pretty well-off, themselves.

The faster you charge an EV, the more waste electricity.

High-speed charging is only needed near highways. In most situations, including yours, much lower speed charging is fine. Even if a few people might WANT high-speed charging, nothing forces to accommodate them. Certainly businesses would generally be happy to force people to stay around a little longer.

the future is in either hydrogen fuel cells or battery-swapping EVs.

That's a pretty idiotic thing to stay, for someone who has supposedly studied the problem in-depth.

Hydrogen fuel-cells are a non-starter. Horribly inefficient, difficult to store, astronomically expensive, etc.

Battery swapping would basically require an end to car ownership. Swapping the battery that you bought with your car, means you're getting the depreciated value of whoever showed-up at the station before you. It means you have to trust the fuel station you're paying $10 to, with he much of the value of your vehicle, and hope they don't completely rip you off, or otherwise just screw-up.

There's no way in hell anybody with more than a single-digit IQ would ever consent to battery swapping. It just can't work, unless we all switch to renting our EVs, making the cost of charging, and depreciation of the batteries something the company has to handle, and we can always get a new one for no extra cost, at any time, no matter what.

Comment: Re:And how long does it take... (Score 1) 176

by evilviper (#47731583) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

I was talking about long-range driving,

No you weren't, because you were using numbers for ALL gas stations. The distribution for EV charging stations would be completely different, and not as simple as just multiplying the number of gas stations by the added charging time, for so-many reasons I don't know where to start.

make the station just the pumps with card paying and they can be incredibly compact.

Not a chance. They're all large, including the ones that have NO convenience store, because of both the large fuel storage tanks that have to be installed underground, and for fire-safety, so when you have a fueling accident, it doesn't burn down the businesses right next to it.

Calculate the cost of adding that to almost every parking spot on a lot

Nope. You only need to install a few. Those who need a charge will park there. Those who don't will choose a non-charger spot. You're still hung-up on the idea of a gas station, which is not what the future looks like.

I'm not talking about the occasional Tesla vehicle going by. I'm talking about a future where this is the dominant form of transport.

It's BS to jump from the today to 100% EVs. The future gets built-out slowly... The first few charging stations will pay themselves off, and keep working, and help pay for the installation of the next few. That's vastly different than pretending that a company needs to install hundreds of them, immediately.

And for this future of yours, that's decades from now, for some reason you're using the high, early-adopter prices of these charging stations, today. Even you can't pretend that's fair.

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 1) 176

by evilviper (#47726163) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

Not only do you have to plan your driving based on where you can find a suitable outlet,

Give them a little bit of time to develop, and they'll be everywhere. They'll get the infrastructure developed even faster, since it just requires existing power lines, and little no-maintenance boxes at the corner of regular parking spaces.

waiting for half an hour every two hours isn't very competitive

I'd say that's about half-way there... Maybe a bit closer. You're already likely to stop every 4 hours or so, for food and restroom breaks. There just needs to be a charging station next to a few of those parking spots, and you'll get fueled up with zero waiting. You sure won't have to go hunt down a gas station and stand around like an idiot, waiting for it to fuel-up.

Saying how wonderful and convenient gas stations are, is like complaining that nobody runs their own steam boilers anymore... It's so wrongheaded and backwards that I can't even process it.

One of the biggest advantages of EVs and plug-in hybrids is that you can fuel-up AT HOME, overnight, drastically reducing the number of times you have to suffer through stopping at a gas station.

Comment: Re:And how long does it take... (Score 5, Insightful) 176

by evilviper (#47726125) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

Replace all the cars on the long-distance highway with EVs and you'll need a service station about an order of magnitude larger in size (i.e. your typical 12-pump gas station becomes a parking lot with over 100 chargers).

Complete brain-damaged nonsense. With fossil fuels, you HAVE TO fuel-up at a station, every single time.

With electric, MOST people will fuel up, slowly, overnight, at home.

In addition, gas stations MUST be large and separate facilities you have to go out of your way to drive to/from.

EV charging stations can be (and ARE) just regular parking spaces with a small device at one corner. That means you just stop for your normal food and restroom breaks, and incidentally, your vehicle is getting fueled up with no extra time or effort from you.

Comment: Re:McDonallds should sue ... (Score 1) 246

by evilviper (#47725039) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

Well - the only data players where I live are Verizon FIOS and Cox. Both of which will charge you $70 per month for data only.

I had Cox at pretty good speeds for about $30/month.

That was true of FIOS, but they currently have a $30/month option with 25/25Mbit symmetric service with 2-yr contract. They also force a $5/month router rental on you, but if you do things right, you can send it back right after installation:

Comment: Re:McDonallds should sue ... (Score 1) 246

by evilviper (#47724925) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

. I'm less than 30 miles from one set of towers and about 40 from the other, and I have far fewer dropouts from DirecTV than from antenna.

I didn't say crap TV antennas don't exist.

Buy a Winegard 8800 and a Boost XT preamp, and that distance should be no problem. I happen to be 50 miles away from the towers, with mountains in the way, and lots of local interference, and still get very good reception.

Comment: Re:McDonallds should sue ... (Score 1) 246

by evilviper (#47724883) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

That's patently false. The digital switch was a knife to the back of anyone using an antenna.

No, it was a huge improvement. I use an antenna, and there was no knife in my back.

I can tell you first hand at our cabin - we got about 20 channels. Since the digital switch, none of them work.

Is it a VHF-only antenna? Did all your local VHF channels switch over to UHF where your antenna doesn't work?

Or was it an indoor set-top antenna with a little tuner knob on top of it, that badly distorts the signal and makes it impossible to pick-up digital signals, where you just need a $6 replacement?

Or are you using a very old 1st gen ATSC tuner? They get better every few years, better at picking up weak signals and better at rejecting interference.

With digital, you either get it, or you don't. There's nothing in between. That means if you were remotely on the edge of the signal before, you're getting nothing now.

No, it goes the other way. When you were getting a mess before, that could barely be distinguished from the background static video and audio, now you can get a crystal-clear picture.

And I can tell you at least where we're at, the broadcast signal strength they're using for digital is significantly lower than it was before.

I find it hard to believe that 20 different channels all reduced their broadcast power. Maybe one or two would do that, but it's more likely you've run into some other reception problem that you haven't figured out.

Comment: Re:I have worked at a few ISPs (Score 1) 246

by evilviper (#47709925) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

One ISP in my area that provides anything beyond DSL speeds.

DSL isn't dial-up. I don't see why people act like 5Mbps internet access is unacceptable, substandard and inhuman.

Besides, they know people want better, and keep their prices low to compensate... That should help you negotiate a better deal with your cable company, who doesn't know you really want the higher speeds.

Comment: Re:McDonallds should sue ... (Score 4, Interesting) 246

by evilviper (#47709911) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

most of us don't have a choice. It's Comcast or no TV.

TV antennas have worked since the 1940s. With the digital switchover is the 2000s, people even further out can get a digitally-perfect picture in higher quality with less artifacts than any cable or satellite provider offers. And you probably have several times more TV channels available to you than you would expect, possibly several good ones that are not even carried on cable.

Since the 90s, direct broadcast satellite has been an option for the overwhelming majority of people. If you've got any way to put a tiny dish where it'll have a view towards the equator, you can get subscription TV while avoiding your local cable monopoly.

And today, with high speed DSL and FIOS, you may be able to get more content than you can watch, for under $10/month. Even if you choose not to go this route, the threat of it is likely to keep your cable co in-line and behaving themselves.

Comment: Re:Is there an counter to this? (Score 1) 246

by evilviper (#47709901) Attached to: Comcast Training Materials Leaked

call your supervisor over, I'd like to speak to them immediately. Inform them that if THEY can't disconnect my service, I'll be asking for their manager as well

There's no legal obligation for them to transfer you to their supervisor. You can ask a dozen times, and the "supervisor" or "manager" you get, will keep being the guy in the next cubicle over.

Suburbia is where the developer bulldozes out the trees, then names the streets after them. -- Bill Vaughn