s/o from Ukraine: Energy dependence / independence as *National Security* issue

[Pam in CT]

The Ukraine thread has sort of brought out into sharp relief how our own national security and general well-being -- and in that case, also that of our NATO partners -- is tied up with energy dependence / independence.

 

Because there are so many aspects of this that are wider than Ukraine, I'd propose a separate kinda-open thread.  The Ukraine conflict necessarily forces decisionmaking that is immediate term (ie policies around the US strategic reserves, and where to procure immediate US supplies). As well, since we are close to energy independent, the stakes for our NATO partners are much higher (which is why Germany appropriately took the lead on the Nord Stream II decision) and their decisions have much greater market-power effects on global prices (even though we too are affected by those prices).

All that is important in the short term. Strategy is also, maybe mostly, about the long term.

 

If we believe in markets, markets function at the intersection of supply and demand. Both supply and demand are in turn affected by price. (Suppliers are eager to provide MORE when prices are HIGH and they can make great gobs of profits; suppliers cut back or exit the business if prices are too low for them to be profitable.  Buyers are more interested in buying most normal goods when prices are affordable; buyers hold off or don't buy if prices are too high. There are exceptions for certain unavoidable necessity items but that is the basic structure underpinning market / economic theory.)

{FWIW: I believe in markets.  Sometimes they arise whether we want them to or not, with unexpected and irritating consequences, but, there they are.)

 

Supply side: Oil and gas is a critical backbone of our current energy sector usage. There are people on these boards who know a good deal about oil and gas extraction in the US, and the relative costs and complications of refinery. My (limited) understanding is that extraction here is economically viable when global prices are high, but becomes ever less viable when prices go down, kind of like what has effectively already happened in the coal business?  So US production of oil / gas is profitable when global oil/gas prices are HIGH. It that more or less right, oversimplifying, or off base?

Supply side: Another aspect of the sector over the longer term is the extent to which we are able to develop renewable energy sources. My (limited) understanding of these is, again the current cost is high (relative to the ~~ average ~~ cost of oil & gas), such that they are more economically viable when oil prices are high and less viable when oil prices are low... and also, the utilization of such resources is limited by energy storage.  So US utilization of such sources is profitable when global oil/gas prices are LOW.  And: batteries. Is that more or less right, oversimplifying, or off base?

Supply side: Another aspect of the sector over the longer term is the extent to which we pursue nuclear power. As our NATO allies have felt compelled to do, despite real misgivings.  Should we?

Demand side: Another aspect of the sector over the longer term is the extent to which we are able to slow down the growth in our aggregate demand for energy. There are household level tradeoffs here (anyone who travels globally can attest: our houses tend to be larger, our cars tend to be larger, and many families here have more than one car whereas elsewhere that is unusual); there are policy tradeoffs (anyone who travels to our benchmark nations can attest: other densely populated nations in Europe, Japan, Taiwan & etc have invested in different types of infrastructure than we have, including public transit, that *enable* households to live high quality of life lives with less dependence on multiple cars per household).

 

Other aspects of the issue? 

 

 

 

[Pawz4me]

As I've been trying to educate myself a little on this over the last couple of days, one new-to-me thing I encountered is how much the quality/type of oil matters, both in terms of which refinery(ies) can handle it and what products can be extracted from it. From my reading it appears that it wouldn't matter how much oil the U.S. produced, we'd still need to buy some from other countries to provide our various refineries with the type/quality they can handle, and to produce the products we need. The "Quality" section from this 2018 article is a good overview.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Pawz4me

[Faith-manor]

The only way we are ever going to get in the ballpark of true energy independence, we have to first consume a heck of a lot less. That may be possible when we eventually hit population decline in this country due to falling birthrate, baby boomer generation gone in conjunction with tight immigration (which in and of itself creates a host of other problems). But most Americans recoil in horror at the thought of lowering consumption, so I don't see it as anything sustainable in the foreseeable future.

There are steps to be made towards it, but all require a substantial outlay of expense and use of fossil fuels now. Massive investment in home insulation, and alternative cooling units, requiring geothermal heating/cooling systems for all new commercial and residential construction where it is geologically feasible, grants to help current owners put in such a system if feasible. Those are two good starters. Requiring proof of business need in order to purchase a pick up truck or delivery truck. At this point, 90% of the pick up trucks driven in our area are for ego and nothing more. They are gas guzzling hogs. But when you propose legislation to restrict the purchase of something or to force conservation, people in this country go bananas. So that isn't going to work. Amazon and a couple of other companies have contracted with GM for fleets of EV delivery trucks. Right now it is net loss because of the energy to produce, and the cost of the infrastructure for charging. But over time will be an energy saver because it requires a lot less fossil fuel consumption for the electricity to charge, than it does to run the comparable vehicle on diesel or gasoline. We have seen the math. The science is sound.

Mostly, I don't think we can make any major stab at sustainable independence because Americans as a large entity are not willing to sacrifice national security and the future of the planet in order to not change their lifestyles or spend the tax money now for the infrastructure. I am all for changing the tax code so corporations have to pay their fair share of of the bill, but with the corruption we have in congress, I don't see that happening either. Just here in Michigan, DTE made an unholy amount of profit in 2020, and did not pay a dime of federal taxes while also fighting tooth and nail against reasonably priced solar offered to homeowners and small business in the state from an alternative energy company. Trust me. Energy companies in the fossil fuel business do not want energy independence in the US because it will kill their wicked profits.

Geothermal is such a good idea. We have friends that put it in when they built their house. It costs them $50 a month in electricity to heat their house. A house that would require $350 a month in propane to heat otherwise. They just put in solar so now they will produce their own heat and cooling 100% going forward so over time, despite th cost of the two systems to manufacture, will be a reduction in fossil fuel consumption and emissions.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Faith-manor

[Spy Car]

While some workers need to drive full sized trucks to do their jobs, the fact that the Ford 150, the Chevy Silverado, and the Dodge Ram 1500 are the #1, #2, and #3 vehicles sold in America today is a national security issue.

Bill

 

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Spy Car
typo

[AnotherNewName]

2 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

 

 

Supply side: Oil and gas is a critical backbone of our current energy sector usage. There are people on these boards who know a good deal about oil and gas extraction in the US, and the relative costs and complications of refinery. My (limited) understanding is that extraction here is economically viable when global prices are high, but becomes ever less viable when prices go down, kind of like what has effectively already happened in the coal business?  So US production of oil / gas is profitable when global oil/gas prices are HIGH. It that more or less right, oversimplifying, or off base?

 

Oversimplifying a bit.  It depends on the type of extraction and what you consider "high".  Shale drilling for oil has a break-even price of somewhere in the $40s and is generally profitable in the $50s (price of oil/barrel).  Natural gas is dependent on more factors but is profitable for most companies in the lowers $2s/MMBtu.  These numbers would not be considered historically high energy prices.  We are facing productions issues due to OPEC/Russia crashing energy prices in March 2020 with the goal of taking out small shale drillers in our country.  This worked, and while current prices are tempting, getting producers (and more importantly investors) to reenter the market when they face constantly shifting prices due to geopolitical concerns along with national politicians openly advocating for policies to punish the industry (not just regulatory but also suggestions the Fed punish banks who lend to the industry) is challenging.

[Pam in CT]

(importing this from the Ukraine thread because it speaks to) another Demand side issue in the energy sector I have not really thought through...

11 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I was struck by an article I read once that basically said our focus is on the wrong place. That we don't need to focus on MAKING more energy, but on not LOSING it. That a HUGE portion of the electrical energy we produce is lost as it travels the power grid. That smaller producton level more locally (including things like home bases solar) are important, since less travel distance means way less power lost, but also we need to be focusing WAY more on buildings that conserve heat/stay cool, etc. That we have the ability to build homes that require almost no heating/cooling, but we don't. ....

So, Katy's raised two related-but-different points affecting the demand side of our energy sector here:  1) a more distributed energy system loses less energy in distribution because the energy doesn't have to travel as far; and 2) investments / technologies that help our buildings conserve heat / stay cool.

Both are nice in that they don't require us to consume less so much as waste less.  Since (as FM and SC both noted), exhortations to reduce consumption is a heavy lift in American society.

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Pam in CT
typo

[Faith-manor]

57 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

While some workers need to drive full sized trucks to do their jobs, the fact that the Ford 150, the Chevy Silverado, and the Dodge Ram 1500 are the #1, #2, and #3 vehicles sold in America today is a national security issue.

Bill

 

 

I 1000% agree if that is even possible! But, when it is mentioned that maybe there should be a restriction on the purchase of them, or huge penalty on registration/tags in order to discourage people who do not need them from buying them (there are discounts already for farms if they produce proof of being a farm so they aren't punished for needing a farm vehicle, same for contractors, etc.), Michiganders lose their ever lovin' minds! Sigh.

My nephew drives one, 35 miles each way to work, and constantly complains about fuel prices and cost to insure. Pick up drivers are risk drivers here. They drive like bat's out of hell everywhere they go unfortunately and are super costly vehicles to repair so they have a very high insurance rate. Meanwhile, he could save thousands of dollars a year and NOT pollute the earth so much if he just bought a car, a used Camry or something. It is all ego, and he is determined to "maintain my way of life".

I don't know how to get Americans to care about anyone but self. As seen through the pandemic, 50% of them can't be bothered to do even simple things to protect their neighbors. They sure as heck are not willing to make any changes on behalf of the earth or to increase national security.

[KSera]

22 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

I 1000% agree if that is even possible! But, when it is mentioned that maybe there should be a restriction on the purchase of them, or huge penalty on registration/tags in order to discourage people who do not need them from buying them (there are discounts already for farms if they produce proof of being a farm so they aren't punished for needing a farm vehicle, same for contractors, etc.), Michiganders lose their ever lovin' minds! Sigh.

My nephew drives one, 35 miles each way to work, and constantly complains about fuel prices and cost to insure. Pick up drivers are risk drivers here. They drive like bat's out of hell everywhere they go unfortunately and are super costly vehicles to repair so they have a very high insurance rate. Meanwhile, he could save thousands of dollars a year and NOT pollute the earth so much if he just bought a car, a used Camry or something. It is all ego, and he is determined to "maintain my way of life".

I don't know how to get Americans to care about anyone but self. As seen through the pandemic, 50% of them can't be bothered to do even simple things to protect their neighbors. They sure as heck are not willing to make any changes on behalf of the earth or to increase national security.

The Ford F-150 Lightening has been poised to be a game changer anyway, but now with the price of fuel, there couldn’t be a better time for it to come out. I think the bigger problem will be they won’t be able to keep up with production. Other truck manufacturers are coming out with their own big pickup electric evs. The main thing to overcome is the extreme hesitance some people have to going electric with their vehicles. People have objections before they even really understand or have any experience with them. Even people who otherwise care about the planet and energy independence and all of that, a large segment for some reason are super resistant on having to give up any amount of convenience in order to make this big change in greenhouse gas production. And the ironic thing is, most of the time, it’s actually an increase in convenience not a decrease. I do think main stream pick up truck EVs are going to shift that though.
 

This is a good topic, and I have more to say about renewables, including solar, but I’ll have to come back for it. We are definitely way behind where we could or should be with renewables in this country. And that’s for largely political reasons that have artificially held us back from where we would otherwise be.

[Pam in CT]

18 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

...I don't know how to get Americans to care about anyone but self. As seen through the pandemic, 50% of them can't be bothered to do even simple things to protect their neighbors. They sure as heck are not willing to make any changes on behalf of the earth or to increase national security.

Well, that's one aspect of the insight in Molly McKew's essay that "what Putin wants" is chaos, because he is better able than we are to take the risks and absorb the costs of navigating through the chaos.

In the immediate context of the Ukraine invasion, as the world shudders at the thought of nuclear weapons use, it's inevitable that we focus first on the "Putin willingness to take risks" side of that insight. But the "ability to absorb costs" is equally critical. It's a whole lot easier for totalitarian dictators to "absorb costs," than, say, American Presidents.  Ordinary Russians are suffering a LOT, already. But their leader, who has already been in office for 22 years and has ensured changes in the "rules" such that he can and almost surely will remain ensconced in place for another 10, is highly unlikely to lose power no matter the suffering of "his" people. Whereas our leader -- whomever it is -- has to care about midterm elections; and -- whomever it is -- is at real risk of being thrown out altogether if ordinary Americans are grumpy about the price of gas or groceries or etc, regardless of the very-limited effect of the President -- whomever it is -- to influence those prices.

That is democracy. It's inefficient, compared to totalitarian states, at "absorbing costs."

 

The thing about markets, though, is that sometimes they nudge people to do the "right" thing in the long run even despite grumpy backlash in the short run. (It is increasingly difficult, forex, to obtain flood insurance in low elevation tidal regions, or homeowner insurance in hurricane regions, even despite our societal/ cultural slowness in "accepting" the implications of climate change. Whether or not we believe, insurance companies in the business of assessing risks and making a profit, do.)

So there is reason to hope that higher oil/ gas prices might nudge auto manufacturers toward accelerated development of EV or lower mileage vehicles, building developers to include better insulation / warming / cooling innovations, and etc. I recall some of that arising out of the OPEC-driven supply shocks in the 1970s, and a lot more technology has been developed since then.

[athena1277]

53 minutes ago, KSera said:

The Ford F-150 Lightening has been poised to be a game changer anyway, but now with the price of fuel, there couldn’t be a better time for it to come out. I think the bigger problem will be they won’t be able to keep up with production. Other truck manufacturers are coming out with their own big pickup electric evs. The main thing to overcome is the extreme hesitance some people have to going electric with their vehicles. People have objections before they even really understand or have any experience with them. Even people who otherwise care about the planet and energy independence and all of that, a large segment for some reason are super resistant on having to give up any amount of convenience in order to make this big change in greenhouse gas production. And the ironic thing is, most of the time, it’s actually an increase in convenience not a decrease. I do think main stream pick up truck EVs are going to shift that though.
 

This is a good topic, and I have more to say about renewables, including solar, but I’ll have to come back for it. We are definitely way behind where we could or should be with renewables in this country. And that’s for largely political reasons that have artificially held us back from where we would otherwise be.

This is one of the reasons I am not interested in an EV right now.  I need something for not only around town, but for trips of 2-6 hours away I make during the year.  Right now there’s not enough charging stations to drive across my state (they recently announced plans to add a lot more so this eventually isn’t a problem).  I also don’t want the long wait for charging when I’m traveling.  I will definitely consider an EV in the future, but not until the technology is closer to what I get with a regular vehicle.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, athena1277 said:

This is one of the reasons I am not interested in an EV right now.  I need something for not only around town, but for trips of 2-6 hours away I make during the year.  Right now there’s not enough charging stations to drive across my state (they recently announced plans to add a lot more so this eventually isn’t a problem).  I also don’t want the long wait for charging when I’m traveling.  I will definitely consider an EV in the future, but not until the technology is closer to what I get with a regular vehicle.

Well honestly, this is what I mean by saying people aren't willing to give up some convenience for the much larger greater good. How often do you drive 6 hours in a day? A 2-6 hour trip is totally doable in an EV, though I realize how easy it is varies a lot by state and you might be in one of the few where it truly is super difficult. A lot of people don't realize how doable it is even in their own state though. There are a few zones in the country where infrastructure is poor, but certainly plenty of people are doing coast to coast trips in electric vehicles. We make trips of that length frequently. If you're driving 6 hours daily, that's one thing. But if it's something you do once or twice a month, I just can't see why having to plan it out a little more makes it not worth the benefit to the planet and to our energy independence. Most of the time, driving electric is MORE convenient because you start every day with a full charge, which with most cars on the market now means 200-300 miles. Most people are not driving more than that on a daily basis, which means most people rarely need to stop to charge when they're out for regular daily driving, whereas everybody has to go find a gas station when their gas powered vehicle is running low. Nobody has a gas station at their house (I'm sure there is an exception to that 😅)

[mommyoffive]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

Well honestly, this is what I mean by saying people aren't willing to give up some convenience for the much larger greater good. How often do you drive 6 hours in a day? A 2-6 hour trip is totally doable in an EV, though I realize how easy it is varies a lot by state and you might be in one of the few where it truly is super difficult. A lot of people don't realize how doable it is even in their own state though. There are a few zones in the country where infrastructure is poor, but certainly plenty of people are doing coast to coast trips in electric vehicles. We make trips of that length frequently. If you're driving 6 hours daily, that's one thing. But if it's something you do once or twice a month, I just can't see why having to plan it out a little more makes it not worth the benefit to the planet and to our energy independence. Most of the time, driving electric is MORE convenient because you start every day with a full charge, which with most cars on the market now means 200-300 miles. Most people are not driving more than that on a daily basis, which means most people rarely need to stop to charge when they're out for regular daily driving, whereas everybody has to go find a gas station when their gas powered vehicle is running low. Nobody has a gas station at their house (I'm sure there is an exception to that 😅)

I think why some people are not going to take the plunge is cost too.  I don't know of every EV on the market, and yes the ones that sit fewer people are cheaper.  But when you want to seat 7 or more (big family problem) and the only options are Teslas and super expensive cars, I mean it just doesn't make a ton of sense.  And even if it works out after 8 years or something like that, most people are not willing to put down 100k for a Tesla to save on fuel costs after a long time.   I hope that as more of these come out, the costs go down too.

But yes I agree that most people don't have any idea how it could work for them.  They either are introduced to it from a friend or family member or are really into the enviroment. 

[Terabith]

I have a friend with an electric vehicle that she uses around town, but when she needs to make a longer road trip, she rents a car.  She says it winds up being way cheaper over the course of the year.  Of course, that depends on how many out of town trips you make.  

Friends we are cat sitting for currently work Ren Faires.  (We keep their cats in the summers when they are at one in Kenosha.). During spring and fall fair seasons, they're driving 4-8 hours each way over the course of weekends.  They love their prius for that.  

[KSera]

1 minute ago, mommyoffive said:

I think why some people are not going to take the plunge is cost too.  I don't know of every EV on the market, and yes the ones that sit fewer people are cheaper.  But when you want to seat 7 or more (big family problem) and the only options are Teslas and super expensive cars, I mean it just doesn't make a ton of sense.  And even if it works out after 8 years or something like that, most people are not willing to put down 100k for a Tesla to save on fuel costs after a long time.   I hope that as more of these come out, the costs go down too.

But yes I agree that most people don't have any idea how it could work for them.  They either are introduced to it from a friend or family member or are really into the enviroment. 

I totally agree, and was coming back to add that I do realize there are good reasons why EVs don't work for right now for everyone, including those in those states who haven't not built out their charging networks well yet (though money for that was recently approved and that should keep getting better).  I was more addressing all the people who really do have the ability and budget to go electric, but have lots of reasons why they "can't" which often are not actually reasons that would hold them back in practice. There is just a whole lot of resistance.

[mommyoffive]

Just now, KSera said:

I totally agree, and was coming back to add that I do realize there are good reasons why EVs don't work for right now for everyone, including those in those states who haven't not built out their charging networks well yet (though money for that was recently approved and that should keep getting better).  I was more addressing all the people who really do have the ability and budget to go electric, but have lots of reasons why they "can't" which often are not actually reasons that would hold them back in practice. There is just a whole lot of resistance.

Like you said, I think EVs would work for a large part of people.  I hope with more charging stations they will work for everyone!!  Even going through what we did with an EV I would go back to it once I knew it would work for us.  I would love to have one or 2 right now.

[Faith-manor]

8 minutes ago, KSera said:

Well honestly, this is what I mean by saying people aren't willing to give up some convenience for the much larger greater good. How often do you drive 6 hours in a day? A 2-6 hour trip is totally doable in an EV, though I realize how easy it is varies a lot by state and you might be in one of the few where it truly is super difficult. A lot of people don't realize how doable it is even in their own state though. There are a few zones in the country where infrastructure is poor, but certainly plenty of people are doing coast to coast trips in electric vehicles. We make trips of that length frequently. If you're driving 6 hours daily, that's one thing. But if it's something you do once or twice a month, I just can't see why having to plan it out a little more makes it not worth the benefit to the planet and to our energy independence. Most of the time, driving electric is MORE convenient because you start every day with a full charge, which with most cars on the market now means 200-300 miles. Most people are not driving more than that on a daily basis, which means most people rarely need to stop to charge when they're out for regular daily driving, whereas everybody has to go find a gas station when their gas powered vehicle is running low. Nobody has a gas station at their house (I'm sure there is an exception to that 😅)

Agreed. And the new EV's GM is putting out are going 450 on a charge, and they are investing heavily in charging stations. So Lower Michigan is a state where this could easily be a thing. Right now except for the run to Marquette to get DS, it is totally doable. The UP doesn't have any EV infrastructure yet. I have also mapped the route for our 12 hr drive to Alabama, and within the next two years there will be enough along the route to do a charge. If we stop at 375 miles, and charge, eat our packed lunch, stretch our legs, we would make it to the Bama house. The main thing is investing in charging stations at both houses or wait until retirement when we will be getting rid of this place. We aren't sure yet. The Sienna hybrid may be the first investment because we will go from 21-22 mph for van camping to 35-36mph which is a very big improvement. Then save for the EV equinox. Right now we are trying to do most of our local running with Mark's Saturn Astra which gets 33-35 mph. My regular equinox, not on the freeway, is 29-30 easy driving or in terms of Mr. gun it and go, 26-27.

Yesterday in the grocery store parking lot a senior citizen lady, probably my mom's age, came up to me to compliment me on the equinox. She is driving some crazy boat of a car, Lincoln or something that gets about 15 mph.😯. Her son has been after her to get something much more fuel efficient. She has decided on an equinox, and has the money saved to pay cash, but can't get one. With the chip shortage and people paying ABOVE msrp, none of the dealerships in a 50 mile radius have a single one in stock. Crazy!

But yes. If it can't be the way it is now, people are unwilling to change. Shoot, this community 15 years ago had the opportunity to get natural gas in town instead of propane and heating oil. Fossil fuel yes, but price wise way better for people. Most of the residents were not willing to pay the $500 up front cost to have their furnaces switched over even though Consumers E offered to foot the bill by paying for the conversion and having it placed on their accounts with payments spread over 12 months. The savings would have been huge. What was the recurring refrain? "I have always had propane. I don't want to change. I don't want the road or my yard torn up." Now they are moaning and groaning about how expensive heating has become.

[Pam in CT]

re widespread EV usage depends in part on buildout of network of charging stations - the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed last fall includes $5B to states to be used to build out their EV charging networks, plus another $2.5B targeted to socioeconomically disadvantaged communities to build networks in those areas, so hopefully that will in time help ease that constraint.

I'm going to try to educate myself more about the issue @ktgrok raised about the potential of more-distributed networks to address energy loss over long distances. I remember, vaguely, that in Puerto Rico's Maria aftermath, sector specialists working on rebuilding their power network (essentially from near-scratch given the magnitude of the destruction) were advising that a more-distributed network would be more resilient / better able to withstand shocks.  That was in the context of *weather* shocks, not energy price or wartime shocks, and Puerto Rico is better poised to avail of solar than many regions in the US; but I'm curious now.  I don't know if there's money allocated in the BIF bill to move in that direction.

[Faith-manor]

3 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re widespread EV usage depends in part on buildout of network of charging stations - the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed last fall includes $5B to states to be used to build out their EV charging networks, plus another $2.5B targeted to socioeconomically disadvantaged communities to build networks in those areas, so hopefully that will in time help ease that constraint.

I'm going to try to educate myself more about the issue @ktgrok raised about the potential of more-distributed networks to address energy loss over long distances. I remember, vaguely, that in Puerto Rico's Maria aftermath, sector specialists working on rebuilding their power network (essentially from near-scratch given the magnitude of the destruction) were advising that a more-distributed network would be more resilient / better able to withstand shocks.  That was in the context of *weather* shocks, not energy price or wartime shocks, and Puerto Rico is better poised to avail of solar than many regions in the US; but I'm curious now.  I don't know if there's money allocated in the BIF bill to move in that direction.

Yes. I feel like we really need to upgrade transmission wires because what we currently have is not adequate or top of the line technology. Really, as a country, our whole infrastructure has stagnated.

[prairiewindmomma]

Looking at plugshare's website, there are places to charge all through the UP...Marquette even has a super charger.  Zoom on the map, I don't see anywhere in the US where there are people where there isn't a charger within 100 miles or so.  In most instances, charging stations are no more than 20 miles apart, even in rural areas.  If your vehicle has a range of 150-300 miles, you can charge at home.  For longer distance trips, those roads all have charging stations.  Now, if you don't want to stop to charge at a supercharger for 15 minutes and feel that that extra 10 minutes is just way too long to wait, that's one thing.....but I get all 🙄 when people tell me that there are no charging stations anywhere near them.  Charging station maps tend to show a different reality. 

ETA link to plugshare: https://www.plugshare.com

ETA: reading my words, that came across sassy—didn’t mean it that way—just pointing out that lack of infrastructure is a weaker argument against EV adoption. Increased vehicle price and difficulty finding them in the marketplace is for sure challenging right now.

Edited March 9, 2022 by prairiewindmomma

[Faith-manor]

48 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Looking at plugshare's website, there are places to charge all through the UP...Marquette even has a super charger.  Zoom on the map, I don't see anywhere in the US where there are people where there isn't a charger within 100 miles or so.  In most instances, charging stations are no more than 20 miles apart, even in rural areas.  If your vehicle has a range of 150-300 miles, you can charge at home.  For longer distance trips, those roads all have charging stations.  Now, if you don't want to stop to charge at a supercharger for 15 minutes and feel that that extra 10 minutes is just way too long to wait, that's one thing.....but I get all 🙄 when people tell me that there are no charging stations anywhere near them.  Charging station maps tend to show a different reality. 

ETA link to plugshare: https://www.plugshare.com

ETA: reading my words, that came across sassy—didn’t mean it that way—just pointing out that lack of infrastructure is a weaker argument against EV adoption. Increased vehicle price and difficulty finding them in the marketplace is for sure challenging right now.

The issue has been in winter time it is very easy to get stranded in "the wilds", and in that case I can run heat only car longer on my fuel car than my EV or at least that is how I understand it, and the last time we checked there weren't as many stations. But I haven't checked in the last year. At any rate, he will be graduating, yay for us! I love th UP, but am so worn out by those long drives on nasty roads in the winter.

I am sure the EV will work for us once we can afford to buy it.

[Pam in CT]

re EV charging station network is maybe better built out than many of us realize

40 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Looking at plugshare's website, there are places to charge all through the UP...Marquette even has a super charger.  Zoom on the map, I don't see anywhere in the US where there are people where there isn't a charger within 100 miles or so.  In most instances, charging stations are no more than 20 miles apart, even in rural areas.  If your vehicle has a range of 150-300 miles, you can charge at home.  For longer distance trips, those roads all have charging stations.  Now, if you don't want to stop to charge at a supercharger for 15 minutes and feel that that extra 10 minutes is just way too long to wait, that's one thing.....but I get all 🙄 when people tell me that there are no charging stations anywhere near them.  Charging station maps tend to show a different reality. 

ETA link to plugshare: https://www.plugshare.com

Thanks for that link - there are indeed a lot more stations in the areas where my extended family live, and along the highway corridors between them than I realized or would have expected.

That is the kind of realization that markets nudge us toward, though -- when prices for something are high, we tend to cast about for substitutes (high cost of soda -> ever considered a Soda Stream?;  rising produce prices -> thinking about stepping up the garden? etc)... which is what I meant upthread that sometimes market forces propel us to make "good" changes that might not otherwise be palatable. I was still a kid during the OPEC oil price spikes, but definitely remember my extended family in pretty much all directions responding by suddenly focusing for the first time on fuel mileage, and turning the lights off when we departed rooms, and turning the heat down when we left the house for a few hours. Small things to be sure, and not real inconvenience, but things that wouldn't have otherwise happened, KWIM?

The EV charging networks may well be better built out than (I at least) realise; and there's additional funding already appropriated on the way to states, so that will -- over time -- help with automobile gasoline. The electricity itself used to charge in most parts of the country, though, is still mostly oil & gas, right? So while moving a segment of cars and trucks towards EV helps at the margin, does it get us to energy independence? Or at least keep us from sliding away from independence as consumption & demand increase over time?

[Faith-manor]

Just for reference, I just checked the State of Michigan EV statistics. There are 1400 charging outlets, across 480 stations so roughly 3-4 spots per station. There are 3.2 million vehicles in the state. So, my guess is that until the infrastructure catches up, there may be places where it is a bit of a wait to plug in if EV's become popular. We really need to get on the stick with infrastructure upgrades.

I would love to see charging outlets at several rest areas along I-75 for road trippers.

 

[kbutton]

FWIW, I think that SUVs are at least as big of a problem or more than trucks. A lot of newer trucks get mileage as good or better than an SUV with more functionality. We can't haul bulk manure, dirt, or rocks in the back of an SUV, and you can't get that kind of stuff delivered here (we can get mulch, but that's it). You also can't use a rental to haul dirty or potentially damaging materials. It's hard to find bare bones trucks anymore--they really are fancy toys at this point. That said, it's appalling to me the number of people who drive trucks for vanity reasons. It's best to have a friend with an old truck that is willing to loan it out (we're currently those friends, lol). We know this truck is likely the only one we'll even known and will try to keep it running for a long time. We bought it well-used. 

I also think that needing a new car every 3-5 years (super common here) is a big waste. We drive ours into the ground or nearly so and buy used. We had the same neighbors for 14 years. I think they went through 6 or 7 vehicles in the time we went through 3 or 4 (two of which we still have several years after we moved). 

[Pawz4me]

9 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

The electricity itself used to charge in most parts of the country, though, is still mostly oil & gas, right? So while moving a segment of cars and trucks towards EV helps at the margin, does it get us to energy independence? Or at least keep us from sliding away from independence as consumption & demand increase over time?

i was curious about that and did a bit of research earlier today. I no longer have the tabs open and am too lazy to go looking again to provide the links, but right now it seems that our power company gets somewhere in the range of 7-9 percent of their power from renewable sources. They project that by 2030 that will be up to 23 percent. I don't know how that increase compares with projected increases in demand and consumption, though. My state (NC) is fourth in the nation in solar power generation (the top three states are California, Texas and Arizona). Texas surprised me. I guess I've stereotyped them as the oil state, but they're doing solar, too.

[Brittany1116]

I live in a rural area near a large university. I know personally exactly one person who drives a large truck here and he is a farmer. I also know no one with an EV.

The city with the Uni put in charging stations and removed them pretty quickly because there was no demand. I'd say 80% of the cars in my area and out to the U are sedans, small SUVs, or minivans. The big trucks are typically fleets, city and county workers, and farmers. 

I do know many people who would love to make green upgrades to their homes and vehicles but for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is cost, they have not yet done so. It's hard to get people to look at the higher level needs when they are scraping the barrel to meet basic needs. 

[Hilltopmom]

I dunno but I’m missing my old passive solar, solar powered, wood stove heated home in 50 acres of hardwood trees.

[Faith-manor]

3 minutes ago, Brittany1116 said:

 

I do know many people who would love to make green upgrades to their homes and vehicles but for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is cost, they have not yet done so. It's hard to get people to look at the higher level needs when they are scraping the barrel to meet basic needs. 

Bingo. This is key. The tax burden in this nation falls heavily on the middle class. Meanwhile, filthy rich corporations use our infrastructure to death to make their billions, and are huge polluters who also stick the little guy with the bill for cleaning up their messes. The place to start is with them. Tax code must be fixed, they must pay their fair share, they need to clean up their super fund sites, and they need to be forced into earth friendliness. That is where we should start. Enough is enough. DTE pays nothing in federal and state taxes most years despite ungodly profits. And on top of that, most green energy initiatives in this state are paid for by state and federal tax revenue! That.is.insane. Enough is enough. This can not be yet another burden on only the middle class and working poor.

[Frances]

7 hours ago, KSera said:

The Ford F-150 Lightening has been poised to be a game changer anyway, but now with the price of fuel, there couldn’t be a better time for it to come out. I think the bigger problem will be they won’t be able to keep up with production. Other truck manufacturers are coming out with their own big pickup electric evs. The main thing to overcome is the extreme hesitance some people have to going electric with their vehicles. People have objections before they even really understand or have any experience with them. Even people who otherwise care about the planet and energy independence and all of that, a large segment for some reason are super resistant on having to give up any amount of convenience in order to make this big change in greenhouse gas production. And the ironic thing is, most of the time, it’s actually an increase in convenience not a decrease. I do think main stream pick up truck EVs are going to shift that though.
 

This is a good topic, and I have more to say about renewables, including solar, but I’ll have to come back for it. We are definitely way behind where we could or should be with renewables in this country. And that’s for largely political reasons that have artificially held us back from where we would otherwise be.

Nm

Edited March 10, 2022 by Frances

[Faith-manor]

Interesting technology.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220309-the-kites-flying-to-harness-the-worlds-strongest-winds

[KSera]

4 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

The issue has been in winter time it is very easy to get stranded in "the wilds", and in that case I can run heat only car longer on my fuel car than my EV or at least that is how I understand it.

It’s actually the opposite. I have a good link on that somewhere that I saved after the Virginia traffic jam debacle. There were a couple early takes by people who clearly had no ev experience saying, “oh no! What if those cars had been electric!” And then later came the articles doing the actual math for people. As I said at the time, in a situation of being stranded in the cold, absolutely put me in an electric car. The heater will run much longer. A gas car has to have the engine on and burning gas to idle the engine in order to run the heater. Electric only operates what it needs to operate, so you’d only be using electricity to run the heater. One of the articles written was by a guy who whethered the whole traffic jam comfortably watching Schitt’s Creek on the display screen in his Tesla 😂. 
eta: here’s one of those articles: https://www.zeta2030.org/insights/im-grateful-that-i-was-driving-my-ev-when-i-got-stuck-on-i-95

4 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

Just for reference, I just checked the State of Michigan EV statistics. There are 1400 charging outlets, across 480 stations so roughly 3-4 spots per station. There are 3.2 million vehicles in the state. So, my guess is that until the infrastructure catches up, there may be places where it is a bit of a wait to plug in if EV's become popular. We really need to get on the stick with infrastructure upgrades.

You forgot to count an outlet at every single family home 😉. Most of the time, you aren’t charging an EV at a charging station, but at home. That’s a big difference it takes awhile to wrap your brain around. And just like they didn’t need to have enough gasoline for every household all at once as soon as cars were invented, so it is with charging infrastructure only needing to increase hand in hand with the increase in EVs on the road. 

Edited March 10, 2022 by KSera

[Faith-manor]

17 minutes ago, KSera said:

It’s actually the opposite. I have a good link on that somewhere that I saved after the Virginia traffic jam debacle. There were a couple early takes by people who clearly had no ev experience saying, “oh no! What if those cars had been electric!” And then later came the articles doing the actual math for people. As I said at the time, in a situation of being stranded in the cold, absolutely put me in an electric car. The heater will run much longer. A gas car has to have the engine on and burning gas to idle the engine in order to run the heater. Electric only operates what it needs to operate, so you’d only be using electricity to run the heater. One of the articles written was by a guy who whethered the whole traffic jam comfortably watching Schitt’s Creek on the display screen in his Tesla 😂. 
eta: here’s one of those articles: https://www.zeta2030.org/insights/im-grateful-that-i-was-driving-my-ev-when-i-got-stuck-on-i-95

You forgot to count an outlet at every single family home 😉. Most of the time, you aren’t charging an EV at a charging station, but at home. That’s a big difference it takes awhile to wrap your brain around. And just like they didn’t need to have enough gasoline for every household all at once as soon as cars were invented, so it is with charging infrastructure only needing to increase hand in hand with the increase in EVs on the road.

I am often long from home in subzero temps with negative windchills. So I will be reading more. Not sure why you are jumping on me. I have said over and over again we ARE investing in hybrid and EV sooner than later. I have certain concerns. I am sure my husband and so will figure out what works.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Faith-manor

[KSera]

5 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Just asking because the requirements for Michigan in terms of keeping a case warm would be far worse than Virginia, I would think.

I expect you’re right Michigan is colder, but the gas powered car would suffer from the same thing, yet is more likely to run out of fuel faster than an ev running only heat would run out of battery. I think it’s referenced in the article I linked, but someone did a trial of this in Norway and was able to stay warm idling their ev for 72 hours (it wasn’t as cold as -20, but still, a gas powered car won’t even last 24 hours idling). 

[AnotherNewName]

3 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

Bingo. This is key. The tax burden in this nation falls heavily on the middle class. Meanwhile, filthy rich corporations use our infrastructure to death to make their billions, and are huge polluters who also stick the little guy with the bill for cleaning up their messes. The place to start is with them. Tax code must be fixed, they must pay their fair share, they need to clean up their super fund sites, and they need to be forced into earth friendliness. That is where we should start. Enough is enough. DTE pays nothing in federal and state taxes most years despite ungodly profits. And on top of that, most green energy initiatives in this state are paid for by state and federal tax revenue! That.is.insane. Enough is enough. This can not be yet another burden on only the middle class and working poor.

You do realize that at least part of the reason DTE Energy has had low tax liability/deferred tax liability is due to tax credits they received for investing in renewable energy, right?

 

[TechWife]

5 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

...The electricity itself used to charge in most parts of the country, though, is still mostly oil & gas, right? So while moving a segment of cars and trucks towards EV helps at the margin, does it get us to energy independence? Or at least keep us from sliding away from independence as consumption & demand increase over time?

EV's are one component of an overall strategy. Another component is solar energy. We have a lot of solar panels and get enough sun much of the year to provide power to our house, which includes charging our EV. We are adding a second EV this year and it won't noticeably affect our power usage. In the summer, with more daylight hours, we sell power to our power company and in the winter when there are fewer daylight hours we buy some.  Overall, we still pull from the grid if you look at at a calendar year, but a rolling 12 months shows some periods where we aren't doing so. Part of the power on our grid comes from nuclear, and some comes from renewable as well - both cleaner than petroleum fired power plants, which we also have (Pawz is on the same grid). We have a long way to go, but I'm very glad we have gotten started. It is really true that it will take multiple strategies for energy independence and to combat climate change. There isn't any one answer, but there are several answers that taken together have an impact. We need to think "both/and" instead of "either/or."

[YaelAldrich]

We, a city dwelling family in a townhome with no driveway nor EV outlet accessible parking spot, would love to upgrade our hybrid Camry and ICE minivan to EV. But we have no outlet to plug a car into. All the apartments and condos around us have the same issue. I guess I could drive back and forth to the local charging stations until I find one unoccupied and pay a company to charge my vehicle. But that's time and effort that is much more annoying than going to a gas station at Costco when I shop there anyways (I typically fill up the hybrid every two weeks, the minivan every six weeks or so). If the condo association won't let us put in solar panels I can't see them putting in EV outlets. I would love to see Boston invest in EV outlets along the street but I'm not holding my breath.

Edited March 10, 2022 by YaelAldrich

[mommyoffive]

10 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

I am often long from home in subzero temps with negative windchills. So I will be reading more. Not sure why you are jumping on me. I have said over and over again we ARE investing in hybrid and EV sooner than later. I have certain concerns. I am sure my husband and so will figure out what works.

Take your time and research before you take the plunge.  Nothing wrong in that.  We had a Nissan Leaf 7 or 8 years ago. It was a disaster in cold weather.  Horrible experience.  Obviously things have changed in 7 or 8 years for the better.  It really has me nervous about getting an EV and dealing with the Wisconsin winters.  I don't want to go through what we did before.  But with more charging stations (especially if they are the fast ones), longer range cars, maybe better batteries for cold(?) I can see how it would work for us.  

For us right now though we don't see one that would work for our family of 7.  However I don't know all the EVs on the market.  I am not really willing to buy a car of a maker I don't know. The Teslas don't look like they could fit 7 adult sized people.  Plus the cost of them is insane.  Maybe after 8 or more years I would recoup the cost of gas over buying a regular car.   We are going with a Toyota hybrid minivan.  Maybe the next car could be a EV, as some of the kids might be out of house.

[Idalou]

2 hours ago, YaelAldrich said:

We, a city dwelling family in a townhome with no driveway nor EV outlet accessible parking spot, would love to upgrade our hybrid Camry and ICE minivan to EV. But we have no outlet to plug a car into. All the apartments and condos around us have the same issue. I guess I could drive back and forth to the local charging stations until I find one unoccupied and pay a company to charge my vehicle. But that's time and effort that is much more annoying than going to a gas station at Costco when I shop there anyways (I typically fill up the hybrid every two weeks, the minivan every six weeks or so). If the condo association won't let us put in solar panels I can't see them putting in EV outlets. I would love to see Boston invest in EV outlets along the street but I'm not holding my breath.

https://chargehub.com/en/countries/united-states/massachusetts/boston.html

555 charging ports in the city! 10% are free? I'd much rather be ' holding my breath', lol, for street outlets in Boston than nearly ANYWHERE else in this country. Bostonians are very fortunate, imo.

Wow, I had not idea Rochester area has even more than Boston. I really need to make this my goal this year.

https://www.plugshare.com/directory/us/new-york/rochester

Edited March 10, 2022 by Idalou

[KSera]

13 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

I am often long from home in subzero temps with negative windchills. So I will be reading more. Not sure why you are jumping on me. I have said over and over again we ARE investing in hybrid and EV sooner than later. I have certain concerns. I am sure my husband and so will figure out what works.

I’m sorry,  I didn’t realize or intend that I was coming across as jumping on you. I’m just perhaps a little overzealous in wanting to correct a lot of the misconceptions that are out there about electric vehicles, and the stuck in cold weather one is one I happen to have particularly read a lot about, and it’s actually quite exciting to me how good they actually are for that scenario, so I can be a bit nerdy about it. Again, sorry if that somehow came across in a negative way.

3 hours ago, YaelAldrich said:

We, a city dwelling family in a townhome with no driveway nor EV outlet accessible parking spot, would love to upgrade our hybrid Camry and ICE minivan to EV. But we have no outlet to plug a car into. All the apartments and condos around us have the same issue. I guess I could drive back and forth to the local charging stations until I find one unoccupied and pay a company to charge my vehicle. But that's time and effort that is much more annoying than going to a gas station at Costco when I shop there anyways (I typically fill up the hybrid every two weeks, the minivan every six weeks or so). If the condo association won't let us put in solar panels I can't see them putting in EV outlets. I would love to see Boston invest in EV outlets along the street but I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, people renting in shared housing definitely have a different set of barriers currently. A lot of apartment/condo buildings around here have put some chargers in, but obviously that needs to ramp up as there are more EVs on the road. I see some street side chargers as well, but that also needs to increase.

[Pam in CT]

There are loads of charging stations in/around my small (but outer ring NYC suburban) town -- the library, town hall, community center, teen center, Y, town watering hole, all the schools, all the playgrounds, most of the soccer fields; as well as some of the chain restaurants and stores (Chipotle, Target). And we would ordinarily charge overnight in our garage. So for my ordinary local routine there's no question it'd be very easy to keep charged up -- I'd actually get better parking spots   . 

And between me and my husband we have two cars, so if we were to have one EV we could always use the other car if we wanted to drive straight through the 7.5 hours without stopping to Pittsburgh where two of our kids now live. (And the more Paneras and Chipotles put them in, the easier just topping off while otherwise having a lunch/bathroom break becomes.) So our next car will likely be EV.

 

To the point that individual households moving toward EVs where they make sense for those individual households... I agree with the insight here that while

14 hours ago, TechWife said:

EV's are one component of an overall strategy....

 it's not realistic that such individual household decisions based on individual driving habits/ geography / preferences / ability to incur the upfront costs could deliver us to "energy independence" on their own. As a society we don't approach *other* elements with national security implications on that kind of basis. 

So those of you who made investments in areas like solar panels...

14 hours ago, TechWife said:

...Another component is solar energy. We have a lot of solar panels and get enough sun much of the year to provide power to our house, which includes charging our EV. We are adding a second EV this year and it won't noticeably affect our power usage. In the summer, with more daylight hours, we sell power to our power company and in the winter when there are fewer daylight hours we buy some.  Overall, we still pull from the grid if you look at at a calendar year, but a rolling 12 months shows some periods where we aren't doing so. Part of the power on our grid comes from nuclear, and some comes from renewable as well - both cleaner than petroleum fired power plants, which we also have (Pawz is on the same grid). We have a long way to go, but I'm very glad we have gotten started. It is really true that it will take multiple strategies for energy independence and to combat climate change. There isn't any one answer, but there are several answers that taken together have an impact. We need to think "both/and" instead of "either/or."

...'m curious -- to what extent do they "pay for themselves" in energy cost savings to YOU (as opposed to doing your part toward national energy independence and/or slowing climate change)? Do you actually own the panels or host them? To what extent  have you availed of various tax incentive or other programs that support the upfront costs?  Is that funding federal or state?

 

 

[Carol in Cal.]

I would much rather have a hybrid than an electric car.  I always favor diversification of energy wherever possible.

[TechWife]

16 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

 

...'m curious -- to what extent do they "pay for themselves" in energy cost savings to YOU (as opposed to doing your part toward national energy independence and/or slowing climate change)? Do you actually own the panels or host them? To what extent  have you availed of various tax incentive or other programs that support the upfront costs?  Is that funding federal or state?

 

 

My DH is the numbers guy - IIRC, the solar panels will “pay for themselves” in seven years. While a lot of people think of solar panels in those terms, It’s a little odd to us to think of it that way. I make other purchasing decisions without wondering what the net effect of buying a more expensive item will be. I’ve never tried to figure our how paying more for a house that is in a better location for getting to/from work, grocery stores, etc. “pays for itself” in terms of saved energy & time over living farther out of town, for example. I just decide I’m willing to pay x amount because it is a more convenient location. 

We do own our system in its entirety. 

Incentives are not available for leased systems or systems on property that you are renting, though the property owner may receive the incentives. 
 

We are often asked if we have electricity when the power goes out. No, we don’t. Because we are in the town limits, we must be connected to the grid. Because of that, when the grid is down, we are down as the grid is unable to accept any excess power we might be generating at that time. This hasn’t been an issue as it is extremely rare for us to loose power.

Financial programs - 

Tax rebates - our initial install was part of our home purchase. We received a 30% tax rebate from the federal government on our 2019 taxes for the cost of the panels & install because we closed on our home in late December of that year. We added panels in 2020 and got a 26% rebate on those, then in 2021 we added more and will get a 26% federal rebate on those. We are now maxed out and cannot add more panels. We may add a storage battery & would get another rebate for that, with the % rebate depending on when we add it. We don’t have immediate plans to do that, though. It’s a “maybe one day” plan. 

Property tax - Residential solar panels are exempt from our property tax, so they are not added to the tax appraisal amount but are added to the value amount for insurance and resale purposes. 

Net metering - when we generate excess power, it flows to the grid. Our electric bill is credited retail price per kWh. In the summer we net credits, which we then use in the winter, when there aren’t as many daylight hours. This is a town level incentive as our town is our electricity provider. 
 

 

[Pam in CT]

re "how long before solar panels pay for themselves" lens

1 hour ago, TechWife said:

My DH is the numbers guy - IIRC, the solar panels will “pay for themselves” in seven years. While a lot of people think of solar panels in those terms, It’s a little odd to us to think of it that way. I make other purchasing decisions without wondering what the net effect of buying a more expensive item will be. I’ve never tried to figure our how paying more for a house that is in a better location for getting to/from work, grocery stores, etc. “pays for itself” in terms of saved energy & time over living farther out of town, for example. I just decide I’m willing to pay x amount because it is a more convenient location. 

We do own our system in its entirety. 

Incentives are not available for leased systems or systems on property that you are renting, though the property owner may receive the incentives. ....

Of course. We bought a new washer/dryer set a few years ago that was billed as Highly Energy Saving, with low water usage in the washer that adjust automatically to how much the clothes put in weigh, and "smart" meters in the dryer that measure by magic or something how much water/humidity is in the clothes and adjust the time and heat accordingly and etc.  They were more expensive than other w/d we could have bought. In theory there is a math calculation that answers the question "how many years before the incremental cost of my Highly Energy Saving w/d "pay for themselves" in terms of the lesser cost of the lesser energy output.

I couldn't care less. Our old w/d set was 25 years old, the dryer had given up the ghost so we HAD to replace at least one of them, I wanted them to match, both of them were LOUD. My husband perused Consumer Report and Wirecutter, we made a choice based largely on factors other than energy savings, and have never looked back.

And that makes all the sense in the world for household level decisionmaking.

And the sum of all such household decisions does not equal a national security strategy.

The logic of the market does not rest on a foundation of what is "good" for US national security; it rests (rightly!! that's how markets work!) on what makes best sense of individual households.

So when oil & gas prices are low, it makes all the sense in the world for households to choose two or more vehicles, with room to ferry everyone in the household to every errand... to choose housing at long distance from where they work or go to school... to choose housing without much thinking about unseen stuff like insulation, or cars without much thinking about mileage, or whatever.  There is nothing in *market forces* that nudges micro-level households to consider macro-level non-market considerations like national security (or climate change). That's outside markets.

 

Which is why I'm interested in mechanisms within the federal / state / local tax systems -- that is one of the places where there CAN be "nudges" that begin to make those micro-household-level decisions more aligned with national energy independence.

So in your case... at the FEDERAL level

1 hour ago, TechWife said:

....Financial programs - 

Tax rebates - our initial install was part of our home purchase. We received a 30% tax rebate from the federal government on our 2019 taxes for the cost of the panels & install because we closed on our home in late December of that year. We added panels in 2020 and got a 26% rebate on those, then in 2021 we added more and will get a 26% federal rebate on those. We are now maxed out and cannot add more panels. We may add a storage battery & would get another rebate for that, with the % rebate depending on when we add it. We don’t have immediate plans to do that, though. It’s a “maybe one day” plan. ...

... the federal government has in effect underwritten ~25-30% of the upfront capital costs?

 

... and then at the town level

1 hour ago, TechWife said:

....Financial programs -

Property tax - Residential solar panels are exempt from our property tax, so they are not added to the tax appraisal amount but are added to the value amount for insurance and resale purposes. 

Net metering - when we generate excess power, it flows to the grid. Our electric bill is credited retail price per kWh. In the summer we net credits, which we then use in the winter, when there aren’t as many daylight hours. This is a town level incentive as our town is our electricity provider. 
 

there's a (fairly modest, it would seem?) advantageous treatment of the upgrade for assessment purposes.

But the town-operated power provider gives you a 1-1 credit for the excess energy you generate in sunny times, which I think (?) is quite generous compared to the rebates given by private electricity providers, or by the various intermediation companies that have popped up who install & own panels that they install on people's roofs and thereafter take a portion of rebates while providing a stream of rental/other payments to the homeowner.

I think town-operated power providers are unusual?  At least in my state. I believe Wallingford is the only town in the state that organizes this way (and manufacturers set up there explicitly because electricity is both cheaper, and less volatile, there).

 

There is nothing available from your state, then?  I think CT has, or at least used to have, some state level rebates as well.

 

[prairiewindmomma]

Many of my neighbors (STEM background people) are putting in battery based grid tied systems so that they have power when the grid goes down. The upfront costs are higher, though, because batteries aren’t cheap. They are also putting in heat pumps. 

[Frances]

On 3/9/2022 at 11:21 AM, KSera said:

The Ford F-150 Lightening has been poised to be a game changer anyway, but now with the price of fuel, there couldn’t be a better time for it to come out. I think the bigger problem will be they won’t be able to keep up with production. Other truck manufacturers are coming out with their own big pickup electric evs. The main thing to overcome is the extreme hesitance some people have to going electric with their vehicles. People have objections before they even really understand or have any experience with them. Even people who otherwise care about the planet and energy independence and all of that, a large segment for some reason are super resistant on having to give up any amount of convenience in order to make this big change in greenhouse gas production. And the ironic thing is, most of the time, it’s actually an increase in convenience not a decrease. I do think main stream pick up truck EVs are going to shift that though.
 

This is a good topic, and I have more to say about renewables, including solar, but I’ll have to come back for it. We are definitely way behind where we could or should be with renewables in this country. And that’s for largely political reasons that have artificially held us back from where we would otherwise be.

Right now I believe the wait time for a Ford F-150 lightning is 2-3 years if you are not on the now closed waitlist. I know someone who would like them for their business. But realistically, they may have to wait for the used market to make it affordable.

[Sneezyone]

DH is holding out for the Ram EV in 2024. He'll be first in line.

[Sneezyone]

6 minutes ago, Frances said:

Right now I believe the wait time for a Ford F-150 lightning is 2-3 years if you are not on the now closed waitlist. I know someone who would like them for their business. But realistically, they may have to wait for the used market to make it affordable.

Just goes to show the demand for utility and fuel efficiency.

[Carol in Cal.]

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Many of my neighbors (STEM background people) are putting in battery based grid tied systems so that they have power when the grid goes down. The upfront costs are higher, though, because batteries aren’t cheap. They are also putting in heat pumps. 

Battery based systems require a lot more maintenance than those without batteries, and the batteries have to be replaced when they wear out.  Also if you have a battery array and one starts to fail, I think you still have to replace all of them, although that was a problem that ‘they’ were working on and I have not checked on it lately.  So it’s a much bigger time and money commitment, not just upfront but ongoing, to include batteries in your system.  I’ve thought about getting solar for our primary home, but if I did, I probably would not include batteries because we are gone so much.

What exactly are heat pumps?  I keep hearing that term but do not understand it.

[Pawz4me]

14 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

 

What exactly are heat pumps?  I keep hearing that term but do not understand it.

What is a heat pump and how does it work? (Carrier)

Heat pumps are widely used throughout the south, or at least my part of it. We had an oil furnace in my childhood home, but as an adult I've almost always had heat pumps. We have two now, one for each level of the house. Ours have heat strips (often called "emergency heat" here), but even though our temps are often well below freezing we rarely have to use the heat strips.

Edited March 11, 2022 by Pawz4me

[Hilltopmom]

On 3/10/2022 at 4:17 PM, Pam in CT said:

There are loads of charging stations in/around my small (but outer ring NYC suburban) town -- the library, town hall, community center, teen center, Y, town watering hole, all the schools, all the playgrounds, most of the soccer fields; as well as some of the chain restaurants and stores (Chipotle, Target). And we would ordinarily charge overnight in our garage. So for my ordinary local routine there's no question it'd be very easy to keep charged up -- I'd actually get better parking spots   . 

And between me and my husband we have two cars, so if we were to have one EV we could always use the other car if we wanted to drive straight through the 7.5 hours without stopping to Pittsburgh where two of our kids now live. (And the more Paneras and Chipotles put them in, the easier just topping off while otherwise having a lunch/bathroom break becomes.) So our next car will likely be EV.

 

To the point that individual households moving toward EVs where they make sense for those individual households... I agree with the insight here that while

 it's not realistic that such individual household decisions based on individual driving habits/ geography / preferences / ability to incur the upfront costs could deliver us to "energy independence" on their own. As a society we don't approach *other* elements with national security implications on that kind of basis. 

So those of you who made investments in areas like solar panels...

...'m curious -- to what extent do they "pay for themselves" in energy cost savings to YOU (as opposed to doing your part toward national energy independence and/or slowing climate change)? Do you actually own the panels or host them? To what extent  have you availed of various tax incentive or other programs that support the upfront costs?  Is that funding federal or state?

 

 

We owned our own solar panels but were not tied into the grid. We had our battery bank. Paid for out of pocket- no grants or tax incentives.

[kbutton]

6 hours ago, TechWife said:

My DH is the numbers guy - IIRC, the solar panels will “pay for themselves” in seven years. While a lot of people think of solar panels in those terms, It’s a little odd to us to think of it that way. I make other purchasing decisions without wondering what the net effect of buying a more expensive item will be. I’ve never tried to figure our how paying more for a house that is in a better location for getting to/from work, grocery stores, etc. “pays for itself” in terms of saved energy & time over living farther out of town, for example. I just decide I’m willing to pay x amount because it is a more convenient location. 

We do. People bring these concerns up on the forum all the time. Whether we can control for that is another story--we were fortunate to have a short commute for my DH for about 12 years. There were years at a time that he went one direction while I went another. 

Anyway, we chose our new furnace and A/C built on this calculation as well (and went with energy saving but not the highest models).

We've bought a house with regard to whether it had updated windows or not.

We added insulation to a house.

We are the people that frequently do the right thing, but it doesn't end up giving us much ROI. We're kind of...jaded. I mean, we take care of our home (second one for us), but when we sold our last home, we got less for it than people whose houses weren't as structurally nice or even as updated inside because we put on a new roof (very much needed) instead of granite countertops or some other flashy thing. Other people with houses that didn't have as good of "infrastructure" sold for more than ours because what people value here is not what is necessarily in the best interest of the house, much less the environment. 

I do have to consider the costs of what would happen if we put in solar panels and they are not valued here. We don't plan to move soon, but my DH is only a year into a new employer. We're going to have a kid in college before something like that would pay for itself. We also have overcast days probably more than half the year.

It's not really a matter of not being willing to put some money into a home, and the cost-benefit analysis is necessary for a lot of us.

 

On a side note, if people are interested in geo-thermal energy, there are companies who are trying to make it economical to install it in existing houses. I know that it's generally easier and more cost-effective for new builds, but that's changing. I am still not sure how it compares to doing something like replacing a convention furnace and A/C. This Old House (or maybe Ask This Old House) had some really good information on it a couple of years ago on their show.