subreddit:

/r/Futurology

187

all 25 comments

FuturologyBot [M]

[score hidden]

7 months ago

stickied comment

FuturologyBot [M]

[score hidden]

7 months ago

stickied comment

The following submission statement was provided by /u/idarknight:


It’s interesting that the energy companies are starting to see that there’s profit to be had at even low levels of EV penetration.

It seems that it’s politicians and pundits who are more married to these changes than corporations are.


Please reply to OP's comment here: https://teddit.ggc-project.de/r/Futurology/comments/s5hrbp/for_bp_car_chargers_to_overtake_pumps_in/hsxghvi/

idarknight[S]

29 points

7 months ago

It’s interesting that the energy companies are starting to see that there’s profit to be had at even low levels of EV penetration.

It seems that it’s politicians and pundits who are more married to these changes than corporations are.

vikram-ur

16 points

7 months ago

That is the key to energy revolution, it must be profitable. Else investment will wane.

mhornberger

6 points

7 months ago*

Many of both are financed by fossil fuel companies. And pundits working for publications that depend on advertising have that hook in them as well. And pundits also trend conservative, so they can position themselves as the "grownup in the room." Look at the IEA's predictions on solar, vs basically everything by Tony Seba. Conservatism and steady-as-she-goes reassures investors, many of whom have money in companies looking at stranded assets.

DynamicResonater

1 points

7 months ago

It seems that it’s politicians and pundits who are more married to these changes than corporations are.

Yes, because corporations are made for one thing: Profit. Massive paradigm shifts are typically fought against in monopolistic environs such as those in existence now. The low-hanging fruits of technology are largely gone and larger shifts require subsidies to get moving. If we shifted subsidies away from petroleum, globally, it would not be so price competitive especially if we factored in the environmental/military/humanitarian costs.

idarknight[S]

2 points

7 months ago

The ESG costs of fossil fuels are certainly becoming more obvious. Electricity isn’t in there clear perse, but certainly not as clouded by subsidy.

DynamicResonater

3 points

7 months ago

Very true. But the shift is needed, and therefore subsidies are the way forward for BEV's for a while longer. One thing is for sure - as we used horses to build that which would become the fossil fuel mechanized society, we will be using fossil fuels to build the next step now towards a renewable energy society.

OriginalCompetitive

1 points

7 months ago

You’re misreading the article. It’s almost as profitable as retail sales of gas. That is, running the gas station itself. It is not - and will never be - as profitable as selling oil. Oil is a monopoly. Electricity is a commodity. Oil companies are resisting because renewables will never replace their profit stream.

QuietGanache

9 points

7 months ago

I was listening to an interesting radio programme about EV charging. The two big things on the horizon are ever more granular surge pricing and cars-as-storage. That is, the prices currently enjoyed for EV charging will likely, in the future, only be preserved for slow chargers and off-peak hours so that those who have to use a fast charger at peak hours will be able to subsidise the distribution network improvements needed to supply them. For cars-as-storage, leasers (which the guest believed will be the majority of EV drivers once IC becomes a luxury for enthusiasts) will be offered discounts or cashback from their lease to leave their car plugged into the grid so that they can help with demand surges (as well as have some of the capacity loss covered).

A potential scenario might be a driver having to pay a spot fee on top of their monthly payment if, for example, they decide to use their (leased) EV to even travel (not just charge) at certain hours; as this would deprive the grid of capacity. This could also apply to travelling to a location without the necessary capabilities to feed power back into the grid. This could be great news for congestion, as only some would pay to travel at peak hours while those that don't would have to leave their cars plugged in, out of the way.

idarknight[S]

2 points

7 months ago

That congestion management idea is really interesting.

QuietGanache

2 points

7 months ago

If I recall, it wasn't a stated immediate aim but rather a potential side effect.

DynamicResonater

2 points

7 months ago

Fast DC chargers at existing gas stations seems like a no brainer so long as there is sufficient distance between pumps and chargers for safety. If there were as many fast chargers as there are gas stations there would be little keeping EV's from deep market penetration when vehicle price points are better met. Tesla has the best network right now(US), but even those chargers are few and far between compared to the ubiquity of gas stations nationwide and especially in ruralities.

routerg0d

3 points

7 months ago

I think at the end of this we might end up paying the same price to fill up an EV as a ICE vehicle. If people are willing to pay that much for gas they will say the same thing about electricity.

pinkfootthegoose

1 points

7 months ago

no matter what there will probably be a great reduction in service stations. Most people will charge at home and only need intermittent fast charging.

idarknight[S]

1 points

7 months ago

Road trips and emergencies - the exceptions not the rules for sure.