That was buy.
We have a 200amp circuit and were already at a theoretical peak capacity of over 190amps before installing the 50 amp Level 2 charger. Had to install a load shedding device to get the charger to pass code (which was far cheaper than upgrading to 300amps.
You might be aware but panel upgrades get rolled into the project and get the 30% federal tax credits.
If you want a low pressure way to get some quotes, energysage is a pretty good site that keeps the sales people at a distance.
My solar system provides me with power…and I get credit for any overage I generate. It doesn’t go back into the grid…CT.
Done in anticipation of getting an Ev…probably the next car.
FYI. Charging opportunities expanding. Be nice.
An EV with a built in gasoline powered generator 
. Makes me chuckle.
One of the biggest reasons people cite when saying they won’t buy an electric vehicle is “range anxiety”: the fear of running out of juice on the road with nowhere to recharge. Stellantis’ Ram brand may have an answer for that, especially for people who need a truck to haul or tow things. It’s called the Ramcharger, a pickup that can travel 145 miles on electricity, with a 3.6-liter V6 gas-powered engine linked to a generator that can recharge the battery while the truck is moving.
Don’t know how often one might need the generator, but doesn’t the gas powered component kinda defeat the purpose?
That said, I had range anxiety for a while before venturing out on longer trips. The other day I’d not charged my car the night before and had to make a long drive (round trip twice for something). Fortunately I was able to charge it after the first round trip, but I am in a special pilot program where I have to charge off peak hours and I hadn’t. Fortunately I could that day. Which reminds me- gotta go plug in!
Yes adding a gas powered generator to an EV does seem counter to the point. I look it kind of like a different version of hybrid and it addresses the range anxiety issue. DH was just meeting with an auto parts manufacturer who had some a couple tidbits on the supply side. The contracts for ICE vehicle parts have been extended from 2026 to 2032. They’ve been approached by EV manufacturers like Rivian to supply parts and they’re taking a pass because they’re not confident these companies will survive the life of the contract as they’ve recently experienced a reduction in EV parts for the major car manufacturers.
A good friend’s son just sold his Tesla. Liked it but the whole charging while living in an apt was inconvenient.
Not new. The Chevrolet Volt was an early example of such, at a time when batteries were much more expensive and much less capacity-dense than now. A somewhat later example was the BMW i3 with the Rex option.
I love my Mercedes - no issues yet and it’s 10 years old but I am looking at the Mazda CX-90 PHEV, just got to wait a little longer.
For what it’s worth, I also have a 10 year old Mercedes and an EV. For anything under a 200 mile round trip I drive the EV; anything over that, it’s the Mercedes.
The difference in the energy cost is huge. 100 miles in the Mercedes costs about $14 in gasoline; 100 miles in the EV costs less than $3 in electricity, charging at home using cheap Washington hydroelectric power.
But driving the Mercedes on the open road - priceless!
Something doesn’t add up here. Too little revenue and too high a loss per EV sold.
The article doesn’t give enough information into draw any meaningful conclusions. Perhaps they’re booking huge expenses on development costs of the plant and equipment needed to build electric vehicles.
Didn’t read the article but I think it’s been widely reported that ford would start reporting results by business unit. Losses in the EV unit have been forecast for several more years due to transition costs. (This is the nature of the business and has been forecast from the start)p; it is not new or surprising).
ICE unit is profitable for now but that is being kept alive primarily to fund the transition, which is necessary due to the challenge of taking on BYD and other Chinese manufacturers in the next several years.
See, there’s a problem with telling people that they need to jump all in or don’t do anything. I don’t think that’s actually a productive message. If you are driving a PHEV and helping save the planet by not using as much fossil fuel then why isn’t that actually a good thing? Driving an ICE car that gets better gas mileage would be a good thing. Driving a PHEV that uses electric power for the first 40 miles, etc, would be a good thing. Not everyone is ready to go full electric. Cut them some “slack”. Don’t tell them to go in all the way or go home. That’s a bad message.
Did you read the article or just the headline? He actually addresses your questions. What I got from the article is that you might as well get a regular hybrid if you don’t want to go all-electric – they are lighter and get better mileage once you are off the electric-only miles. And if you are planning to use that 30-40 miles (and not use gas) regularly you are probably a good candidate for a EV. His point is that the plug-in hybrids don’t offer much as a middle step.
Exactly! Get a regular hybrid (Toyota makes a great selection) or go with an EV if all trips are short distance (under 200 miles RT). PHEV is substantially more expensive than a regular hybrid and just doesn’t pay off.
Yes, I read the entire article, thanks for asking.
Again, it’s actually discouraging people from taking a step. A regular hybrid is a great option but why not plug in every night to get those electric only miles but still have the option to take a 200 mile trip without having to find a charger. Seems like a great option. Or just tell people that’s not actually good enough that you are doing something.