There has been at least one new way of doing it i cant remember the name but you can look it up. It's more economical also.

But as to the CA and EV's, they just approved a 1 billion dollar charging project for EV's mostly trucks. They intend to go totally electric not sure if you read that or not.
Now why would they need a project like that

Um, to encourage more electric vehicle purchases? Replacing gas stations is very expensive and current charging infrastructure is in wealthier areas of california. In the next few years, poorer people will be buying used EVs and need to charge them. The land (space), step-down transformer, Level 3 charging station, software and signage is estimated at $500k for a 6 to 8 port station. So, as your title says, we would need a project like that to build about 2000 charging stations across California.
Nothing in the bill to increase generating capacity or modify the grid - not necessary at this point. Sometime in the future, it not now. It's not like they are having rolling blackouts because of too much demand. Demand today is less than 2008. See chart above.

 

Um, to encourage more electric vehicle purchases? Replacing gas stations is very expensive and current charging infrastructure is in wealthier areas of california. In the next few years, poorer people will be buying used EVs and need to charge them. The land (space), step-down transformer, Level 3 charging station, software and signage is estimated at $500k for a 6 to 8 port station. So, as your title says, we would need a project like that to build about 2000 charging stations across California.
Nothing in the bill to increase generating capacity or modify the grid - not necessary at this point. Sometime in the future, it not now. It's not like they are having rolling blackouts because of too much demand. Demand today is less than 2008. See chart above.

Well ok i'll wait to see what happens over the next few years.

 

Well ok i'll wait to see what happens over the next few years.

Are you implying that, an eventual need for additional power plants or transmission lines are somehow proof that last year's rolling blackouts were caused by EV charging?

 

Define "a lot". Desalinization is typically done with reverse osmosis. Best if powered by wind or solar energy.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi9_fGjpdH7AhVIlIkEHZb9AF4QFnoECCoQAQ&url=https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/14/california-approves-desalination-plant-as-drought-hits-water-supplies.html&usg=AOvVaw35GuFAOU1D-pgWklmmIn1y

The theoretical absolute minimum amount of energy required by natural osmosis to desalinate average seawater is approximately 1 kilowatt-hour per cubic meter (kwh/m3) of water produced, or 3.8 kilowatt-hours per thousand gallons (kwh/kgal). The actual SWRO energy requirement in the 1970’s was 7.0 to 9.0 kwh/m3 (26-34 kwh/kgal). With recent technological advancements and innovations in high efficiency pumps, energy recovery systems and overall higher efficiency plants, the actual expected consumed energy has reduced to 2.5 to 3.5 kwh/ m3 (10-13 kwh/kgal).

To put it in perspective, supplying a home with desalinated water (from a large installation) adds 10% to its energy usage.

 

Are you implying that, an eventual need for additional power plants or transmission lines are somehow proof that last year's rolling blackouts were caused by EV charging?

Well no maybe i misspoke if i said that, but i cant help but think it is at least part of the problem. I do believe that if not it WILL be part of the problem as the charging stations have to put out more than an entire house uses if they turned everything they had in the house on at the same time. Luckily it's not too long to charge with a huge current supply but as EV's becomes more widespread i can not beleive that there will not be a problem at some point. There will be millions of people with EV's wanting to charge, and many at the same time. Maybe would could go over the numbers and try to think about what this would do to the grid.

 

I do believe that if not it WILL be part of the problem as the charging stations have to put out more than an entire house uses if they turned everything they had in the house on at the same time.

Of course there will eventually be a need for additional electrical production and distribution capacity. I have no idea where people get the impression that replacing the millions of gallons of gasoline used daily with electricity can be done with existing infrastructure. The point of the previous posts is that the 0.5% of total electrical power used in california today has somehow pushed their grid over the limit and caused rolling blackouts in California - especially when California has managed to decrease electrical consumption by 12% in the last 10-years. Of all states, California is best positioned to handle a complete replacement of gas for electrical because of their past energy saving actions. Aging infrastructure will need to be replaced but new generating capacity is questionable (assuming they continue to get service from hydroelectric power in Washington and Oregon).

 

Of course there will eventually be a need for additional electrical production and distribution capacity. I have no idea where people get the impression that replacing the millions of gallons of gasoline used daily with electricity can be done with existing infrastructure. The point of the previous posts is that the 0.5% of total electrical power used in california today has somehow pushed their grid over the limit and caused rolling blackouts in California - especially when California has managed to decrease electrical consumption by 12% in the last 10-years. Of all states, California is best positioned to handle a complete replacement of gas for electrical because of their past energy saving actions. Aging infrastructure will need to be replaced but new generating capacity is questionable (assuming they continue to get service from hydroelectric power in Washington and Oregon).

Yes some things in CA dont make sense to me but i'll wait and see what happens in the coming years.

Oh and i have the answer to your question:
" If a chicken-and-a-half can lay an egg-and-a-half in a day-and-a-half, just how many one-legged grasshoppers does it take to kick all the seeds out of a dill pickle? "
The correct answer is "17".

[note that answer has been gleaned from a South Park episode]

 

https://www.teslarati.com/califonia-banning-tesla-fsd/
California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

Finally, something from Cali that I agree with. It’s a stupid law but Tesla marketing it as “Full Self Driving” was stupid.

 

https://www.teslarati.com/califonia-banning-tesla-fsd/
California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

Finally, something from Cali that I agree with. It’s a stupid law but Tesla marketing it as “Full Self Driving” was stupid.

The CPSC and NHTSA should have done this long ago on a federal level.

 

The CPSC and NHTSA should have done this long ago on a federal level.

Elon actually believed AI hype when they started the beta testing years ago that level 4/5 was possible for Tesla 'soon'.

 

Elon actually believed AI hype when they started the beta testing years ago that level 4/5 was possible for Tesla 'soon'.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...t-wages-war-on-techs-hype-machine/ar-AA16yDyA

Robot taxis? Hyperloops? A top technologist wages war on tech's hype machine

https://rodneybrooks.com/predictions-scorecard-2023-january-01/

On January 1st, 2018, I made predictions about self driving cars, Artificial Intelligence, machine learning, and robotics, and about progress in the space industry. Those predictions had dates attached to them for 32 years up through January 1st, 2050.

As part of self certifying the seriousness of my predictions I promised to review them, as made on January 1st, 2018, every following January 1st for 32 years, the span of the predictions, to see how accurate they were. This is my fifth annual review and self appraisal, following those of 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. I am over a seventh of the way there! Sometimes I throw in a new side prediction in these review notes.

 

Will we see a real self driving car in our life time?
No, they will silently creep up behind us, so we don't see them, and that will be the end of our life.

Seriously, I can think of examples of where an Arduino could do a better job than some drivers I know, but roads in the UK are relatively narrow and given the appalling mistakes made so far with engineering design (i.e. the Tesla regenerative braking where it was so effective from high speeds that people drove into the back of them because the engineers were stupid enough to forget to put the brake lights on!) I really don't think it's likely in the next 50 years. With enough sensors, and AI, maybe it can get to the point where the car virtually drives itself and is quick to alert the driver to re-engage if he/she loses concentration but what about the sleeper code which a disgruntled employee inserts as a leaving present which makes all the cars turn sharp left at a given time and date.

 

https://www.theautopian.com/teslas-...deo-was-the-start-of-where-things-went-wrong/
Tesla’s Faked 2016 Autopilot Video Was The Start Of Where Things Went Wrong

The other method, the one Tesla has chosen and still sticks to, is what I just described up there. It’s Autopilot as we know it, where the human is secondary, monitoring the AI, waiting to see if they need to take control—something humans are terrible at. It’s the sexier approach that, while legally saying all the right things about paying attention and being ready to take over, still implies that you’re living in the future, in a car that drives you around like a robot chauffeur.

That 2016 video, with its misleading opening text and (as we now know) fundamentally disingenuous nature, came to define Tesla’s Autopilot path, and that path was one that played up the “this car will drive for you” and “this car will be a robotaxi that will make you money” angles instead of the safety angles.

 

https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/24/waymo-lays-off-staff-as-alphabet-announces-12000-job-cuts/
Waymo lays off staff as Alphabet announces 12,000 job cuts

Reading news about company layoffs isn’t at all surprising in 2023 after the year we just had. Most companies, including Alphabet, find themselves course-correcting after hiring for a different economic reality than we find ourselves in today. Last week, Alphabet cut 6% of its global workforce, or around 12,000 people, including, we’re now learning, part of Waymo’s team. Area 120, Google’s in-house incubator, was also significantly affected by the layoffs.


The cuts at Waymo, however, might go deeper than the surface-level economic issues that are affecting virtually every technology company. After Argo AI shutdown last year, many investors and OEMs have become more bearish on the future of autonomous vehicles — at least in the near term. The problem of self-driving is consistently a hard and expensive one to solve. Autonomous trucking competitor TuSimple also recently laid of 25% of its staff in order to streamline operations and keep the company in business. As part of its restructuring, TuSimple decided to scale back freight expansion, particularly as it involves unprofitable trucking lanes.

 

More of the same. Of what use is a "self driving system" if it requires constant human monitoring in order to avoid an unexpected catastrophe?

Mercedes leapfrogs past Tesla on automated highway driving​

The Mercedes system is considered Level 3 Automation, as defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers. It’s more automated than a Level 2 system, like Tesla’s Autopilot, General Motors’ Super Cruise and Ford’s BlueCruise, in which the vehicle’s brakes and steering operate on their own in certain situations but the driver is still required to pay attention to the road at all times.

 

More of the same. Of what use is a "self driving system" if it requires constant human monitoring in order to avoid an unexpected catastrophe?

Mercedes leapfrogs past Tesla on automated highway driving​

There's little practical difference between levels 2 and 3 on the requirements of driver responsibility.. Both require driver attention to stay in the driving loop. Level 3 is IMO more dangerous as it will require the driver to take over in a emergency situation while reading a book or watch a movie with little or no actual situational awareness in a time-frame of less than a few seconds. IF the driver fails the switchover, the car will likely fail-safe to stopping in lane, in a possible bad situation, like we see the driver-less taxis in SF do.


https://www.theautopian.com/level-3-autonomy-is-confusing-garbage/

Level 3 is worth talking about now because cars that claim to have L3 automation, like the Mercedes-Benz EQS with the Drive Pilot system are now set to come to America this year, so it seems like the peculiar traits and issues associated with Level 3 should be widely discussed before cars operating under L3 parameters actually start to be deployed on roads in quantity.
...
Simultaneously telling a human in the driver’s seat that they do not need to pay attention unless, you know, they do, is a recipe for trouble. There’s no way this contradictory approach can end well, especially because the L3 specification makes absolutely no mention of what sort of failover procedures should be in place when the human is not able to take over in time–and that amount of time, again, isn’t clear at all.

 

Just got BMW X7, it's got next gen cruise control. Once set, it will keep line, start and stop in traffic, steer. Park the car.
Based on my tests to day over 2 months, it's very reliable on motorways, very few errors. In complex city traffic it's glitchy. Too much unusual staff is going on. It randomly brakes, looses line keep, poorly judge traffic conditions for accelerate and brake rates.
In any case, it's worlds apart with good old cruise control we had in 2000's.This is progress over 20 years, and it's also fairly low tech example compared to Tesla.
If rate of advancement continue, is 20-40 years will will have somewhat reliable autonomous (non supervised) systems. I think, they will all have to be 'online' as compute power required appear to be very high.
In any case, I hold good parcel of Tesla shares, obviously I am optimist

 

The true value of self driving cars is not driving, it's something more valuable, called time to do other things like sleep.

 

The true value of self driving cars is not driving, it's something more valuable, called time to do other things like sleep.

+1
My favourite aspect on long drives. Even with partial autonomous. It's is a rest time vs driving time.