Literally any location in the northern US, especially the more rural and more dense urban, and doubly true if you make under 30k per household person and don't already have a circuit in your garage for an electric oven or electric clothes dryer. I suspect the same is true for other locations in the world.
Well, FWiW the Australian (and New Zealand) standard across the entire country is 240v with (most) internal circuits rated for 10 A .. but a call to an electrician gets you a { 15 | 20 | 25 | 32 } amp circuit pulled from the household breaker box (if high amp circuits weren't added at build time) [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS/NZS_3112
In other EV news an Australian state (South Australia) had a net 104.1 per cent wind and solar over seven days (ie produced more renewable energy than total energy used and exported the excess) [2], and in my state "Renewables reach 84 pct share of world’s biggest isolated grid" [3]
[2] https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australias-incredible-week...
[3] https://reneweconomy.com.au/epic-stuff-renewables-reach-84-p...
So, uhh, we have the infrastructure to charge EV's in isolated rural parts of the country and have had for decades .. increased generation is an issue but we have plans to significantly increase global green hydrogen production and export excess over local demand.
My comment specifically mentioned a 2030 or 2035 mandate, which is a US mandate. Why would you argue against a US mandate by talking about Australia? You're not doing the EV group any favors by ignoring the problems people describe that prevent them from buying one, and there is currently no US legislation to enable a mandate in the timeframe it would be required.
No. How did arrive at that conclusion? Did you misread the user names and assume I made that comment?
> Why would you argue against a US mandate by talking about Australia?
You made a statement about other places in the world which was false, I gave an example of why it was false. You are now better informed, you're welcome.
But no, what I said was not false. I said that I suspect there are other locations in the world where this is true (meaning northern US isn't the only one), and the reply was that there are locations where it isn't true (Australia).
A few points of note;
* like or not Australia as a country is an interesting case study wrt "how do other countries fare?" .. we have charging capabilities .. but hellish distances between towns outside of cities. On the plus side the vast bulk of the population is urban | near urban .. so it's only the actual outback | rural | FiFo types that may be left with ICE down the timeline.
* Future mandates are aspiration and exert a pressure to change; come crunch day it may have come to pass that sufficient recharge capability has been pushed out to Backwater Dale in Banjo County .. or not. When the reality comes to pass there is the option to modify policy in the face of some areas being better suited for mandated EVs than others.
In the US, I also do not care much about whether cars are EV or not (my only actual hangup about EV as a technology is the raw material sourcing. It is perhaps as immoral as how we obtain oil, and we do not have a story on what to do with the waste). I may even buy one in a couple years (I run all my cars to the point where they need constant repair, and only buy used cars, so the average age of my cars when they are retired is about 12 years). But that is different than the fantasy that EV as a primary form of personal transportation will work for the vast majority of the northern US.
I think the opposite of the intended effect will actually happen. We are forcing a mandate without a means for it to work.
This is actually a larger problem in Canada than the US, and most of the political and policy discussion is in favour of this change.
I am discussing the mentality of the opposition in the US and the reasons they cite where the EV solution does not work for them. If your government is committed to making it work by 2035, that's a different matter. The US government has made no such commitment, they only discuss mandates. All of the pain, none of the gain.
Only North/Central America and Japan uses ~100V systems. The rest of the planet uses ~200V systems where more wattage in your outlets is standard.
Brazil (which is in South America) has many cities using 110V/115V/120V/127V (you can see at https://antigo.aneel.gov.br/tensoes-nominais which voltages are used for a given city). Note that a single city can have both ~110V and ~220V, and sometimes both can be found in the same building, or even in the same room.
This is where I'd hope a government looking to encourage EVs would step in and help, if they're trying to make things happen before 2035.
E.g., in my area, the regional council has a scheme where home owners can get a very low interest (or even no interest) loan to install good insulation, and you can also get another one to install a heat-pump.
They're run through banks, but backed by the regional (and maybe central?) government.
But, doing something like this will, initially, only subsidise the people who can already afford to buy an electric vehicle.
TL;DR - it used to be that you couldn't refuel your car unless the servants brought more on horses, as the only service stations focused on oats. But we invested in infrastructure.
https://www.fox29.com/news/pennsylvania-warned-of-rolling-bl...
This is not an artic circle problem. This is a problem that affects way more of the world than you seem to realize. Sorry that we don't all live in mild climates.
I'm unsure why wind-chill is relevant to a car being charged in a garage?
> This is a problem that affects way more of the world than you seem to realize.
The original commenter was stating that EVs were entirely unsuitable for a hypothetical person.
The only way that it I can envisage it being entirely unsuitable is if they had no access to grid electricity.
My comment about a hut in Siberia is based on that.
Yes, some Americans might need to upgrade certain circuits, but that's not an blocker, it's just an implementation detail.
I'm very well aware of how cold it can get in the USA, but that doesn't prevent EV use, it just requires investment in infrastructure, and that's an investment I'd hope a smart government would subsidise if it's serious about reducing emissions.
Public transport will also have to be EV based. Trains won‘t cut it in most areas outside cities.
And besides - what you‘re saying is insanely risky. You want to keep going with ICEs for 15 years? This would just push back the necessary transition another decade. We would loose the time we desperately need to make the necessary changes.
Now compare that to the seemingly endless number of evangelists who think that 10 years from now is a good time to impose a mandate to kill all new ICE vehicle manufacturing, in spite of EV tech being only 80 years (or 30 years of "modern tech hard push") behind ICE infra.
This is how every conversation about EV goes.
Person A: "look how awesome EV is!"
Person B: "yeah, but it won't work for me based on where I live and the needs I have from a car. It seems foolish to push a mandate for a technology that can't be proven to work how the vast majority of people need it to work."
Person A: "you are being unfair in your comparison!" or "no, you are only imagining those problems!"