This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Electric cars?

Would you buy an electric car?

  • Already own one

    Votes: 10 5.1%

  • Yes - would definitely buy

    Votes: 43 21.7%

  • Yes - preferred over petrol car if price/power/convenience similar

    Votes: 78 39.4%

  • Maybe - preference for neither, only concerned with costs etc

    Votes: 38 19.2%

  • No - prefer petrol car even if electric car has same price, power and convenience

    Votes: 25 12.6%

  • No - would never buy one

    Votes: 14 7.1%
  • Total voters
    198
Jump to new
That seems smart, it might even mean more renewable projects could go ahead in regional NSW along that transmission line route.
 
now i don't follow the mainstream news much in the last 4 years , but i don't remember many power outages in Perth ( compared to nearby city Brisbane )

so the East Coast ( including SA ) is hunky dory , until there are floods , fires , plants breaking done and power lines falling down in the wind ( or a transformer blows up )

as a participant in that single market , i would rather park my cash in NZ power companies , maybe it is because the grid is less complex
 
divs4ever said:
but Perth to Adelaide ?? ( and vice versa ) ( or where it is really needed Melbourne and Sydney )
Click to expand...
From a technical perspective it could be done.

The economics however would be pretty terrible and that has stopped any real consideration of the idea historically. Poor economics since firstly it would cost a fortune to build such a line, second it'll have very substantial losses.

Never say never though. The idea's been around and at some future time it might possibly stack up financially to do it. Just as most of the other interstate links were around as an idea a very long time before they were built.

Eg Victoria - Tasmania was first investigated in the 1930's, finally built in 2006 but prior to that it simply didn't stack up economically.

For a brief history of power transmission in Australia:

1916 - Waddamana power station to Hobart 88kV line commenced operation. That marks the beginning of the power grid as we know it in Australia today, being the first proper transmission line built anywhere in Australia.

Original film from 1916 of the official opening of the power station and associated works is here:
No sound there - movie cameras with sound hadn't been invented yet.

1919 - Waddamana to Launceston line in service, connecting the existing Launceston power scheme to the Waddamana scheme, thus creating an actual grid of sorts with two power stations supplying it.

1922 - By this point Tasmania had a transmission system which facilitated distribution to most of the state's population. The Waddamana power station was now 7 times its original 1916 size and transmission extended to the south, north, north-east and north-west with the distribution network rapidly being built to connect homes and businesses.

1924 - Yallourn 'A' Power power station and the associated Yallourn to Melbourne transmission line operating at 132kV opened. Since Melbourne had 3 existing power stations in the urban area, including one in the actual CBD itself, this was a grid from day one.

Victoria then rapidly proceeded to build new lines and electrify the state as Tasmania had done. The other states didn't really do it until many years later however.

Major milestones in transmission:

1916 - 88kV transmission in Tasmania

1924 - 132kV transmission in Victoria

1938 - 110kV transmission in Tasmania

1942 - 132kV transmission in NSW

1946 - 110kV transmission in Queensland

1953 - 132kV transmission in Queensland

1954 - 132kV transmission in SA

1956 - 220kV transmission in Victoria.

1957 - 220kV transmission in Tasmania. 132kV transmission in WA.

1959 - 330kV transmission in NSW and Victoria. First interconnection of the NSW and Victorian systems via the Snowy lines.

1960 - 275 kV transmission in SA

1970 - 500kV transmission in Victoria.

1975 - 330kV transmission in WA. 275kV transmission in Queensland.

1984 - 500kV transmission in NSW

1987 - 132kV transmission in NT

1990 - First interconnection of SA and Victoria with 2 x AC lines.

2000 - First interconnection of Queensland and NSW via single DC line.

2001 - Additional interconnection of Queensland and NSW via 2 x AC lines.

2002 - Additional interconnection of SA and Victoria via new single DC line.

2006 - First interconnection of Tasmania and Victoria via new single DC line operating at 400kV. Was the longest undersea HVDC line in the world when built (has since been surpassed overseas).

2007 - Closure of the last part of the original 88kV transmission system in Tasmania.

Coming soon:

SA - NSW first direct interconnection between the two states with 2 x AC lines. Known as Project EnergyConnect. Capacity 850 MW.

Victoria - NSW ("VNI Minor") basically pushes a bit more through the existing lines. Adds 170 MW.

Proposed interstate links:

Tasmania - Victoria with 2 new HVDC undersea cables rated at 750 MW each, known as Marinus Link 1 & 2. Indicative timing late 2020's for the first one, 2030's for the second.

Victoria - NSW with new AC lines to be built.

Queensland - Mt Isa. Not interstate but it connects the presently separate Mt Isa and surrounding areas power system to the NEM via a new AC line known as CopperString 2.0

All that said, and bearing in mind the subject here is EV's not power transmission, not even "electric" Smurf would argue that building transmission lines enhances the environment. There's the odd random bit of electrical infrastructure that captures the attention of tourists and amateur photographers (notably Tarraleah (Tas) and Tumut 3 (NSW) power stations) but in general that's true in my view.

I'd argue that transmission lines, wind, solar and even more controversial things such as large scale hydro developments are less bad than fossil fuels, since their impact ultimately is reversible eventually, but they still don't improve upon nature. As I've said countless times over many years "All Power Pollutes" because it does. The detail and scale of impact varies but it all impacts something somehow and done on a large enough scale that becomes all too apparent indeed it's scale that tends to highlight the problems and which lies at the heart of conflicts involving environmental issues.

That being so, well my argument is that sure we could dot the landscape with transmission lines and so on but that's not an objective in itself. If we can instead charge EV's in a "smart" manner, maximising use of existing infrastructure rather than pushing peak demand right up, then that makes a lot of sense both economically and environmentally. We can't have no impact with present technology but with a sensible approach we can get more out of the infrastructure, we can reduce the amount that needs to be built if better use is made of it. EV's, since it doesn't really matter what time they're charged so long as they are, are an obvious candidate for doing that.

The biggest problem with all this energy stuff though isn't engineering, environment or economics. Rather, it's the religious-like approach many take to it.

It's an unfortunate reality that many have very "rusted on" positions and ideas that simply aren't backed by anything factual. That goes for all sides from those who are rusted on to ICE vehicles through to those who start preparing signs and a megaphone the moment someone even hints at building a transmission line or, heaven forbid, a dam.

My view is firmly that a rational, scientific approach is the right way.

There are circumstances where EV's are problematic but many others where they're workable.

There are locations where transmission lines, wind farms, solar farms, hydro or whatever ought not be build on environmental grounds because there really is something endangered living there or it really is a unique landscape and so on. There are many other places however where there's nothing unique and that couldn't be restored fairly easily sometime down the track.

There's a need to continue with some fossil fuel use for the medium term at least but there's much that can be done, now, to start moving away from it fairly quickly.

And so on. Stick to the facts, look at each case and consider the options. Sometimes an EV is the best solution, sometimes petrol / diesel still wins. Sometimes there's a compelling case for conservation of nature because of what's there, other places putting an area of unremarkable land under water, running a transmission line across it or covering it with solar panels is a small price to pay so as to use less coal. Etc. Take a scientific approach not a "religious" one and the way forward becomes far clearer.
 
Last edited:
Value Collector said:
Uptake will be so gradual, and the charging technology so easy, I can't see there being any issues.
Click to expand...
The charging technology is good. Most owners of cars drive to work & back 79% of the time, all they need to do is charge at home; easy & cheap. The remainder of their driving is weekend trips & holidays, which is not a problem with a bit of easy planning.
 
If only life was so easy.
 
I have looked at NZ quite a bit too.
 
Yep, I have had a Model 3 since 2019, been up and down the east coast multiple times, road trips are no problem.
 
Value Collector said:
I have had a Model 3 since 2019, been up and down the east coast multiple times, road trips are no problem.
Click to expand...
Ignoring the means of powering it, putting aside that it's electric, how do you rate it "as a car"?

Just curious really as to how it compares as a car, ignoring the fact that it's electrically powered so focusing on handling, ride comfort, overall vehicle practicality and so on?
 
and price wise , comparing apple to apple...not tesla vs micra but tesla vs top end BMW
 
qldfrog said:
top end BMW
Click to expand...
Had a look at a BMW factory in Germany 4 years ago. Just the normal public tour that anyone can do (but a tip for anyone who does - you need to book in advance, can't just turn up randomly as it's rather popular and there are limited places available).

One thing they said which stuck in my mind was that larger petrol engines would be the first to go. The last ICE BMW's sold will be the cheapest and slowest basically.

That was just part of what they said, it wasn't in response to anyone asking a specific question, so presumably it reflects the company's official view. Presumably the tour guide's commentary would be in line with what management's told them to say.
 
By many ways, I see EV as the anti democratisation of transports, suits perfectly with the Davos Reset, less cars on the road, the plebs back in public transport requiring even less income so the Kings of the universe can cruise freely with larger profits while we melt the old ice fleet into pig iron for more high density social housing.
You would imagine manufacturers rushing to build micro EV cars (a la Japan domestic market style, those cars you rarely see here :ICE but doing 4l/100km).
But nope, all the mini micro EV projects/models seems to die...
Either via economic or political will
 
Isn't it amazing how ill fitted EVs actually are to the US Australia non city living conditions/lifestyle?
And the solution proposed seems to be: change lifestyle,move back to high density cities..
 
well given how well successive QLD government plan and build infrastructure , inner-city ghettos are their best way of looking efficient

i am waiting for buildings to self-destruct like some are in Sydney ( isn't it amazing such disaster centres escape the news currently )
 
i was thinking BIG heavy gas guzzlers would be the last to go , because some need towing capacity as well as distance ( those with trailers/boats/caravans )
 

Its definitely the best car I have ever driven, the only thing I would change in regards to the design of the model 3 is the size of the boot opening, but the Model Y fixes that.

I am not a car guy, so I have never really paid a lot of attention to cars before, but I certainly love the model 3.
 
divs4ever said:
i was thinking BIG heavy gas guzzlers would be the last to go , because some need towing capacity as well as distance ( those with trailers/boats/caravans )
Click to expand...
Electric Vehicles are more powerful than petrol and diesel cars, and are better suited for towing.

check out the Tesla Cyber truck, it has a range of 800km.

 
time will tell

Musk is no Henry Ford

BESIDES the WEF predicts you will own NOTHING

why would you buy a depreciating asset if you believed that agenda will succeed ( wouldn't you be better leasing it )
 
divs4ever said:
time will tell

Musk is no Henry Ford

BESIDES the WEF predicts you will own NOTHING

why would you buy a depreciating asset if you believed that agenda will succeed ( wouldn't you be better leasing it )
Click to expand...
I think that will be the way in the EV future, then the manufacturers wear the dead battery issue, rather than waste recyclers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...