Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Electric Vehicles' started by Husamia, Nov 3, 2016.
Great news the official press release !
As we all know this will not happen if the candidate from Queens turns out to be the winner. I think this has been pretty well thought out, considering the issues involved.
While it's a good start, they have a long ways to go before they have the coverage of the Supercharger network.
I'm very positive on the article, however, any way to edit the title and fix those typos?
Looks like a study to do a study.
Anyway why is WY out of the loop for this and superchargers? Is there a problem with I80 across WY?
Tesla has been building superchargers while the federal government is planning meetings of"stakeholders".
Good timing, along with the VW funds. The article says every 50 miles which I think is brilliant since it will usher in an era of cheap, 150-200 mile range EVs for local and regional use. I just hope a fast DC charging standard (way over 50 kW) is chosen. 200 kW sounds right.
regardless of who wins a president can only opine, it is up to congress to make it happen. I think that the US is still a constitutional republic guided by laws, and presidential decrees carry little weight beyond the bureaucracies he oversees.
Those same bureaucracies have enormous influence, money and power. They are otherwise known as the executive branch of government. E.g., have you ever heard of the EPA ?
I would also not discount executive privilege, or executive veto power of the crazies in Congress. Or the power to start wars.
There is a lot more, but it is insane ignorance to think that the president of the US is anything but an extra-ordinarily powerful position, and much more so in the hands of a fascist lunatic. You should read a little history of what happens to weak constitutional republics.
Right. But the press release also lists several auto manufacturers (BMW, Nissan, GM) as "committing to help accelerate the deployment of electric vehicle charging infrastructure along the Alternative Fuel Corridors designated by the U.S. Department of Transportation."
Tesla is notably absent, which I think is unfortunate. Eventually it will be better if Tesla Motors is a participant in these types of cooperative efforts. The "optics" of cooperating with such efforts would be better if Tesla doesn't look like a maverick, I suspect.
I can guess why Tesla isn't in the list. Either they were not asked, or Tesla decided they are already doing enough and did not wish to do what might seem to be wasting time sitting in meetings. Either way, it is unfortunate.
Proprietary Charging technology is not going to be used.
More than this, I think Tesla doesn't need the national network; the other suppliers (car makers, etc.) could make use of it. Once it has been built, Tesla can go ahead and design a converter plug so that their cars can also use it. Tesla shouldn't feel ashamed to do this; after all, they committed their own money to building their own SuperCharger network first, so Tesla has already invested a lot. The non-proprietary standards at the time Tesla started were too behind, and Tesla had a real existing product that needed immediate rational and working support; it had to be proprietary. It's just history.
My take is that Tesla, Elon, and the world are in favor of competing EV infrastructure existing, but that they will participate in sensible ways.
My interpretation of this is that the other manufacturers are going to get around to doing EV; this is a good thing. The more they mimick Tesla, the better, if that's what it takes to clean up our air.
As a taxpayer, I'd like that basically none of my tax money be used to subvert progress. (Figuring that out, of course, is hard; generally, I am against taxes on principle, for this reason, but if subsidies to bad approaches are already present, then fair parity for the good approaches is the lesser evil if all the subsidies aren't eliminated.)
Based on this, I think the orders for the Bolt are going to increase!!
I would like to see more done with alternative energy, by the Feds, for the areas hard hit by the decline of coal. Not sure what, since I am not an expert in coal mining or alternative energy generation. Some kind of manufacturing, servicing, etc? Make the signs they talk about putting along the corridors??? I think it would not only help these folks that are getting left behind, but help our entire country embrace alternative energy. I currently see an Us vs. Them kind of mentality when it comes to alternative energy and continuing to mine and frack. I can empathize with when whole towns are shut down due to coal production declining.
I see Pittsburgh is a city listed. Arlington, Virginia is too. But what about Kentucky, West Virginia, and other areas in Pennsylvania? Anyone have any ideas?
I am surprised that Tesla is not involved. However, they are a company that has reinvented several industries and is continuing to do so. Maybe working with bureaucrats doesn't suit them.
the epa cannot operate without funding, who do you think provides the funding? hint it's not the executive branch. In a few months the nightmare will be over and hopefully version 2 will not win next week.
Yes, the WP article hit my inbox too.
Cross-country trips in electric cars are about to get easier
Don't take my earlier comment as criticism of Tesla; that was not intended in any way. If CCS deployment uses a standard that at least meets the current SC technology I expect Tesla to join the group. Alternatively, if the roll-out benefits Tesla at least as much as it costs them in opening up their technology to general use, I think Tesla will join in. As it stands neither is true.
My local news (San Francisco ABC7News) started their piece out with pictures of Teslas. Then they go on about how the government is thinking of building this out for all those poor EV companies that refuse to build out any chargers on their own. All this while Tesla adds hundreds to their already existing infrastructure, which was never mentioned. Sounded more like an ad for GM, but the part that steams me is the attitude that GM, Ford, Nissan, BMW. etc., etc., EXPECT some one else to pay for nationwide charging. They have no plans, and in fact have different plugs. Sure, CCS is great for GM, but Leaf uses CHAdeMO. On top of that, this "nationwide" charge route is most likely going to be the s-l-o-w chargers we find behind the bank and the drug store, but we make it sound like "we" are really doing something great and how it will up sales of EVs. And again, we never mention that Tesla sales are higher than all other sectors of luxury sedans or SUVs, with Model X increasing 230,000% over last year.
That's sorta biased. I wrote my station. I hope someone writes to this group.
When looking at that list of participants in the program, there are some really curious names missing.
In fact, the list is mostly comprised of utilities or charging providers.
The only auto companies participating are BMW, Nissan, and GM.
I can understand why Tesla is not participating, but the others puzzle me. All but Honda and Toyota make BEVs, right?
What does participating even mean?
Best I can tell from using my handy Politicos™ Decoder Ring, is the list is companies that wish to wet their beaks in gov't backed loans or perhaps even grants. They will also bribe the DOE to make sure the wind blows in their direction.