Since electric cars are growing in popularity faster than anyone could have predicted, what will America do with all our empty gas stations in the future?You can't convert all of them to EV charging stations, because EVs rarely ever even use a charging a station (300+ mile range means you just charge at home every night).
>what could we possibly ever do with all these suddenly-disused commercially zoned corner lots on large roads?? they'll just get bought, demolished, and turned into restaurants or bank branches or some shit what kind of question even is this
>>1912996Who knows, they could be like dead malls: Just an empty and especially ugly eyesore sweeping across the country.
>>1913000Dead malls stay empty because malls are so massive and purpose-built that's it's generally not worth demolishing or repurposing them. It's not especially cost-prohibitive to tear down a gas station and rebuild, or even just remove the tank/pumps and renovate the convenience store. Slightly more expensive than a typical plot because you have to deal with environmental hazard shit but they're on corners which makes the lot more valuable anyways. I don't expect many gas stations to sit abandoned long term unless they're in a shrinking/stagnant town where *any* shuttered business will sit abandoned with no buyer.
>>1912994Will never happen. EV appliances are defunct and the combustion car is the pinnacle of automotive technology.
gas stations don't make money from selling gas but through their convenience stores
Dead gas stations remain a blight on their neighborhoods. It's because of hydrocarbon soil contamination. If the underground gasoline storage tank leaked (protip: they ALL leak), the owner is responsible for cleaning it up. Nobody wants that unlimited liability so the land can't be sold to any but the most desperate deep-pocketed buyers. So they just sit there and rot forever.
>>1913077Most of what you said can be debunked with a cursory search on the subject
>>1913077If the lot is worth anything they just dig out the dirt and pay to make it someone else's problem. If it's not worth anything then they just let nature take its course and monitor natural attenuation while it sits looking like the image you posted.
>>1913087It can? Like: I’m only casually involved in the situation, that’s just what I hear from folks on the business side of things, but it seems a likely story to me. If you’ve done a slightly less cursory search on the subject than I have, what debunking have you found?>>1913091That’s where I come in: I sometimes run a “Geoprobe” drill rig that takes soil samples to tell where and how deep the contamination might be. Never seen one come up clean myself, guess it happens but pretty rare. Anything can be done with enough time and money but it takes a LOT to dig all the dirty dirt up and haul it out to the dirty dump. It’s a lot even by urban real estate standards. An old gas station will sit there looking ugly and derelict and dragging down the whole neighbourhood for decades on end. Can’t be sold, can’t be redeveloped, for some weird reason it can’t even be demoed and turned into a little park or something, just is what it is.
>>1913077The only time gas stations remain abandoned is if the neighborhood is such a flaming garbage dump that no one wants to touch the land. Even shitty neighborhoods that tear down and dig out the gas station part still use the convenience store. In neighborhoods that aren't complete shit, gas stations are quickly and cheaply redeveloped into other uses that sit on the same lot, often restaurants (Starbucks is a popular choice, especially if the lot is small), bank branches, newer gas stations, and in rare cases, dense development.
charging stations take more foot print than gas stations...Since you need to charge for way longer per car...
>>1912994>massive subsidies, government mandates, and a stupid war that spiked the price of gas>still only about a thirdloooooooooooooooooool
>>1913003>It's not especially cost-prohibitive to tear down a gas station and rebuild, or even just remove the tank/pumps and renovate the convenience store.I think the environmental/site cleanup actually ain't cheap.
>>1913096>I sometimes run a “Geoprobe” drill rig that takes soil samples to tell where and how deep the contamination might be. Never seen one come up clean myself, guess it happens but pretty rare. Anything can be done with enough time and money but it takes a LOT to dig all the dirty dirt up and haul it out to the dirty dump. It’s a lot even by urban real estate standards. An old gas station will sit there looking ugly and derelict and dragging down the whole neighbourhood for decades on end. Can’t be sold, can’t be redeveloped, for some weird reason it can’t even be demoed and turned into a little park or something, just is what it is.Damn that's actually pretty interesting. I assumed many would sit empty just because there'd be so many. I figured site cleanup would cost money like anything else but I didn't know it'd be that much.
The land would be sold and redeveloped into shit like a bank or fast goyslop food chains or just left abandoned for decades because the cost for soil remediation wouldn't be worth it.
>>1913765It usually isn't. A developer has to have deep pockets or stand to really benefit from remediation. I know in my city a few old gas stations were redeveloped into 40-50+ floor condo skyscrapers since the land held such value, but out on the suburbs or in rural areas they tend to just rot away for a long time because the land is worthless and polluted.
Canadian guy wrote a long explanation for the prevalence of abandoned gas stations and it's pretty interesting. tl;dr the site contamination is usually quite bad, and quite deep in the soil. Harrowing to think of all the nightmares that oil companies subtly wreak on our landscape.https://www.patrickjohnstone.ca/2013/04/whats-with-abandoned-gas-stations-part-1.html
>>1913096Does the soil test positive for contamination even in more recent gas stations? From what I read the contamination mainly happens in older gas stations using single-walled steel tanks that always leaked. Modern stations use double-walled plastic tanks with leak monitors.
>>1912994A couple of things.1. Not all of them will go away, a small, general purpose convenience store in bumfuck nowhere with a bathroom is convenient. Even if you don’t sell gas you still sell fast food, snacks, soda, energy drinks, coffee, tobacco, and beer.2. In more developed areas the dying ones will be replaced by other small businesses that don’t require a lot of floor space. Food, dry cleaning, stuff like that.3. In less developed areas the failed ones will just rot. Minor highways across the US are littered with long abandoned gas stations. If there’s no one who lives within a mile there aren’t really any feasible businesses that can survive with such low traffic and nobody will buy the land a gas station sits on no matter how cheap it is.
>>1913789>2. In more developed areas the dying ones will be replaced by other small businesses that don’t require a lot of floor space. Food, dry cleaning, stuff like that.I think you're underestimating the cost of cleaning up decades of soil contamination. Only on SUPER VALUABLE land will it be feasible for the owner to clean that up and sell it.
>>1913930I think you're overestimating the cost to make a political point on your favorite echo chamber, /n/If a gas station can't stay in business then few if any other businesses could, that's why they don't get developed
>>1913935Ah, a butthurt troll.The cost of contamination and site cleanup for old gas stations is extraordinary, and the land can't be sold until the it's cleaned up. That's why so many gas stations sit abandoned for so long.
>>1913942>extraordinary costI've seen that posted in here with no examples
>>1913772There's one in my suburb that closed down and they've been trying to sell it for years but it's always been empty. It's in a prominent location near two highways, but I presume the cleanup cost is so high that nobody wants to deal with paying for it. A mexican food truck used to park there at nights and it got a lot of business, but it moved away. Kind of a shame cause it's not a bad location.
>>1912994>Norway 90% electric cars>China 30%>UK+France 23%>USA only 8%Why?
>>1913971In Scandinavia cars are a luxury of the rich, the hoi polloi are bugmen who have to use the government-approved pod stations for transportation. This means anyone who can afford a car can also afford to buy a brand new electric. The same is true to a lesser extent in China and western Europe. In America, everyone no matter how poor can own a car. Even the minimum wage burger flipper with a shoebox apartment can experience the freedom of having an old shitbox sedan that brings them anywhere they want at any time. This does mean a large portion of the car-owning population can't afford a Tesla out of pocket though.
>>1913971>Electric cars is a gubmint plot to steal my freedum and get rid of coal mining better buy a big truck at 20% apr instead
>>1913971I can get off the interstate, fill up, piss, and be back on the interstate in less than 10 minutes with an ICE car. Not so with electric... that and the poor build quality and high price of electric cars.
>>1913971Oil is subsidized to be artificially cheap in the US.Of course as time goes on the marketshare of EVs steadily increases in the US anyway.
>>1912994ev are shit thothe solution to moving people around is..... rail! just like our great grandparents figured out
>>1913983Xiang spittin facts!
>>1913988Rail only works when cities are dense and towns are small enough to walk from one end to the other in 10 minutes. Nowadays population growth has made towns miles across and no one wants to live in dense cities because of crime and minorities, plus you can get everything you can in a city while living in the suburbs but while having a nice big private house with a lawn instead of a tiny pod in an apartment tower. The masses have spoken, they want to live in suburbs where the quality of life is high. Rail is transportation for an urban society. The car is transportation for a suburban one.
>>1913992>suburbs can't be serviced by rail because.....reasons!nice imput muttoid, consider keeping quiet next time
>>1913992American cities have been rapidly densifying the last 10-12 years.
>>1912994You're assuming that everyone could charge at home - I couldn't, and neither could my neighbors; there are no outdoor outlets in our apartment complex. One way or another, at least some gas stations will need to be converted.
>>1913997>anything under 50k is too low a population to support a proper rail service >build long-distance rail into suburb anyway>so non-dense that 99% of residents aren't in walking distance of the station >build tram to transport people around the suburbs to the train station >costs hundreds of millions to build a line that stops in 87 different disconnected subdivisions and takes hours to get to the station while making dozens of stops an hour, all to service ~10k residences right outside a mid-size city they could just drive to in 15 minutes
>>1914005>>anything under 50k is too low a population to support a proper rail servicenice rule you made up, what else can you plop out of your orifices >costs hundreds of millions to build a line that stops in 87 different disconnected subdivisions and takes hours to get to the station while making dozens of stops an hour, all to service ~10k residences right outside a mid-size city they could just drive to in 15 minutesgranted even your dumb design is cheaper than every fatass owning 1+ car and driving down the same clogged road in the same direction at the same time with every other fatass retard every single morning and back in the evening
>>1914001Because people are getting poorer. As soon as another large-scale economic upswing happens, people will be moving back out to the suburbs because they can afford a nice house on their high school grad salary again. All it would take is another world war, or a shift of manufacturing back home from China, or any number of other things, and your decades of careful walkable city planning will be torn down to make space for more freeways through downtown
>>1914008Show me a single successful and economically viable rail line serving a population of sub-50k from within the past 50 years The kind of traffic you're describing only occurs on highways in major cities (LA, NYC, etc) Suburban areas around minor cities and towns rarely see any notable traffic. I can drive from my suburb of a 30k pop town to the nearest 150k pop city in like 15 minutes and not get stuck behind another car once
>>1914009Wrong, lol, multifamily construction picked up more as the economy picked up.
>>1914012Folkestone (pop 47,000) has 2 train stations with a combined 1.2 million passengers a year (1.7 million pre COVID)https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folkestone_West_railway_stationhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folkestone_Central_railway_station
>>1914013"the economy" is not at all the same thing as the actual financial situation of average people, moron. multi-family housing construction increases when "the economy" "improved" because massive landholding and construction conglomerates can get lower interest rates on loans to build. people today have on average significantly lower real income and purchasing power than they did 70 years ago though, and that's been continuously trending downwards. when people can afford to live in houses, they stop living in apartments. if the real salary rises or real estate prices drop to the point that it's feasible for people to move out at 20 and buy their own house again, we'll see another mass exodus to suburbs. this has been a thing since the beginning of civilization, wealthy roman elites built villas out in the countryside, they didn't live in insulae with all the poors
>>1914020t. never studied anything related to economics or real estateLol.
>>1914020First you said people would move to the suburbs as soon as there was an "economic upswing," then you contradicted yourself by saying the economy doesn't matter.Cartards are never able to formulate a coherent argument.
>>1914033>>1914034Ah ha! Got him, Xiang.
>>1914034"the economy" as it is for megacorporations and GDP is not the same as the economy as it is for average working/middle class people. stop pretending to be braindead lol
>>1914043Ah, no true scotsman fallacy. Got it.
>>1914044that's not even what that means, you're not going to win any arguments by spouting off random meme words you saw on Reddit
>>1912994Refill it with synthesized gasoline from laboratories since it is still the best battery available aside from diesel.
>>1914039Get married, have kids and stop posting on 4chan.
>>1912994>you just charge at home every night).Have you considered just how much energy transport uses?A typical electrical vehicle consumes up to 100kW while accelerating and more generally consumes ~15kWh per 100km. ~7km / kWh or ~4.5 miles per kWh. e.g. 50 miles is 1kW for 11 hours or 11kW for 1 hour.How much do your other electrical appliances consume?An oven: ~2.5kWA refrigerator: 700 WattsA TV or computer: 300 Watts, 500 Watts.A water heater: 2.5kW.For most people, their electric vehicle will consume far, FAR more electricity than all their other appliances combined.So how many existing vehicles are there? In the USA, about 280 million.280 million vehicles to be replaced with electric, all apparently just being plugged in and charged overnight.Germany for example, have one of the highest electricity prices; electricity costs about €0.28 /kWhAn average gasoline vehicle will do about 8l/100km; 12.5km/l - 29mpg.So this means there is now a direct connection between the price of gasoline and the price of domestic electricity. The current price of gas in Germany for example is about $7.34/gallon - €1.80/litreGiven that litre allows you to travel 12km, that is equivalent to 1.7kWh of electricity. So todays €0.50 of electricity is equivalent to €1.80 of gasoline.I am heavily investing into electrical utilities across all the countries which are electrifying their transportation system because I expect the price of domestic electricity to at a minimum match the price of gasoline over the next decade. i.e. To quadruple or more.I'm also heavily investing into heavy engineering companies, because power stations don't just appear out of thin air.And I'm heavily investing in coal, nuclear and oil companies because power stations need fuel.You are going to be paying me every time you charge.
>>1913992American cities have built a lot of urban infill development so they're a lot denser. And they're not going to "empty out" because there's nowhere to go; the country's in a massive housing shortage. American cities will keep getting denser and denser for the next 15 years at least, because cities are adopting more apartment-friendly policies (building more transit, bike lanes, ending parking minimums, etc.)You sound like you're way out of the loop on housing.
>>1914082Just goes to show you that building your country around cars is a stupid idea. Cars introduce all kinds of problems that people didn't foresee, whether they're ICE or electric.It'd be way smarter for USA to invest in a high-speed rail network. It would save us loads of energy.
>>1914113I don't see why he'd be Chinese when China's expressway network is longer than the US interstates. You need to stop letting them live rent free in your head.
>>1913096Why can't it be turned into a little park? Just remove the asphalt and let it be greenspace
>>1913077Yeah but mom and pop don’t own any gas stations these days
>>1914492Big Oil companies are happy to just let the land sit vacant for a couple decades rather than clean up the mess caused by the oil.
>>1914148Everybody on the train board who likes trains is a Chinese spy, it's the only logical explanation.t. that guy
>>1914014Their website says a train comes every 30min and takes 19min to get there, which is about how long it takes for a car to get there, but you also have to walk a lot farther to your destination and there is no trip back from 2334 to 0523.>>1914019Folkestone is the point where the UK-France Channel tunnel terminates and where train and road traffic concentrate at; it's not really fair to say that the railway (let alone the tunnel) are there just because of the town.I also couldn't find how much fare/taxes these towns provided their respective railway either, so unless you can show how much, these are hardly conclusive examples against >>1914005.
>>1913116>charging stations take more foot print than gas stationsAnd you need some room for the gen set.
>>1913971Americans are retarded, have you seen their cities?
>>1912994No amount of shilling can justify the price and bad quality of electric cars.>estern yuropoor
>>1913971Because norcucks and chinks are communists. (((EV))) are semitic garbage.
>>1912994>because EVs rarely ever even use a charging a station (300+ mile range means you just charge at home every night).Do you get paid to lie?Literally 40 year old gas cars have better range.
>>1914919>Literally 40 year old gas cars have better range.More than 80% of all drivers do fewer than 25 miles a day. No, electric cars will not work for all, but they can work for most.
>>1914920>No, electric cars will not work for all, but they can work for most.I don't disagree here, but the fundamental reality is electric cars have shit range so it's funny seeing OP being smug like theres some paradigm shift happening This shit isn't going to scale up when theres millions of additional electric cars that are doing 1/3 the work yet overloading the grid multiple times over.
>>1914920>citation neededAlso how many car owners do not have an option to charge?Also how many car owners regularly travel over 200 miles?Also enjoy zero range when you turn on AC or heating. EV appliances are defunct.
>>1914932>This shit isn't going to scale up when theres millions of additional electric cars that are doing 1/3 the work yet overloading the grid multiple times over.You don't go to the gas station every day. There is plenty of overnight capacity when electrical demand is low. Is it enough for everyone to go 100% electric? No, but not everyone needs to make the switch. >>1914939>muh absolutes Good job getting those goal posts off the field. Stop being a retard, not everyone needs or should get an electric vehicle. You people with your head up your own ass about it can't even conceive a world where they both can exist.
>>1914984>urbanite retard in his 15 minute shithole can't comprehend the purpose of a carChecks out
>>1914989>can only think in absolutes Nothing I wrote precludes anyone from buying or operating one type or the other. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/observer/obsonline/all-or-nothing-thinking-more-common-in-people-with-anxiety-depression-and-suicidal-ideation.htmlI genuinely hope you get help, anon.
>>1913974You're deliberately mixing up needs and wants and telling stories not reflective of the truthUSA has 831 vehicles (all vehicles, to be fair) per 1000 people, all the men, women and children.Norway has 635 and, interestingly, Finland has 790 I.E. your point is moot.>bugmen who (have to use)* the government-approved pod stations for transportation*Can use>In America, everyone no matter how poor (can)* own a car.*Needs toIs this really how you think?
>>1912994Same thing Americans do with all empty real estate: convert them into parking lots.
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/all-the-arguments-against-evs-are> A map of charging stations across the U.S. shows that there are very few areas left with no stations, and the Inflation Reduction Act is going to add a lot more. So the chances of being stranded in your EV have really dwindled to a very low level.>That leaves just the minor annoyance of having to wait to charge your car. Charging is a lot slower than pumping gas, so if you take your EV on a long road trip, you might have to go eat or hang out at the rest stop for 20 minutes. But for almost everyone, this occasional minor annoyance will be far outweighed by the fact that with an EV, you almost never actually have to go to a charging station, ever.
>>1914999>Same thing Americans do with all empty real estate: convert them into parking lots.The US has more land dedicated to national parks and forests than the size of some countries.
>>1915005Says the goy running to defend the status quo entrenched multi trillion dollar industry whenever someone mentions cycling or some shit.
>>1915005>stating you have an option that may or may not be better than the status quo makes me a jew I regret telling you to get help. Kill yourself.
>>1914997>cagetrolls>thinkingDude, have you read their posts?
I don't get why idiots are saying PEOPLE WILL NEVER BUY ELECTRIC CARS when you can plainly see in the OP how fast they're taking off. It's exponential growth.
>>1915011>have you read their posts?I did, and the most concerning part is how much coherent and genuine-seeming text there is.This seems to not be a troll, they're serious.At least I will know I've won when the inevitable ACKposting starts.
>>1914984Excess capacity doesn't really matter when the grid is not configured to handle it. Most homes can only supply about 1 kW at a time to a charger (1 kW ≈ 120 Vac × 8.5 Amps, assuming a perfect 1.0 power factor), so ideally you're only going to get around 8 to 10 kWh a 'night.'This means it takes 40 to 50 hours to charge the typical EV 80% of its capacity using the standard 120 Vac outlet (what most homes have) and then you're still limited to 16 to 40 miles for a night's charging, which isn't really enough for going to work and running errands, especially if you have a long commute, no charging outlet at work, or live in hot or cold weather (all bad for batteries). If you have a higher end model, you might have enough capacity if you charged on the weekend, but you still won't have a lot of leeway (no driving on the weekend).The level 2 charger looks better, but the grid would have to be rebuilt to accommodate the higher power usage and the amount of power drawn would more than fill in the dip in power used at night. Given the rising cost of installing stable sources of power (i.e. not renewables) and the general increase in outages in the U.S. over time, most grids would probably struggle to provide this extra power and maintain an acceptable level of stability.Hybrids make more sense to me than EVs; they can harness energy from regenerative braking, they don't need as much time or power to charge, they don't need as big a battery nor as extensive charging infrastructure, and they still have the longer ranges and shorter refueling times of ICE engines should one need it.Pure ICE cars would still be better for long distances, EVs are best for short/infrequent commutes, and hybrids are the middle option best suited for most people's needs.Source: https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-basics/charging-speeds
Here's a good comprehensive article on why EVs will never overload the power grid.Also, keep in mind America is building a lot of PV and constantly expanding the capacity of our grid.>The average US car drives less than 40 miles a day, which means they can usually go 5 days without charging if they needed to, but they can definitely pick when they will charge as long as they can plug in. Most plug in at night, when there is the most excess power capacity on the grid, and power is the cheapest. In the future, more will plug in at work, but there will be excess capacity until about 2pm for those cars. A very small number of cars on road trips will need to charge in the late afternoon, and they will pay a premium for it.https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradtempleton/2022/09/12/evs-wont-overload-the-power-grid-in-fact-evs-and-ice-are-its-salvation/?sh=1b637c1a49c5
>>1912994Hydrogen stations. Fuck china fuck ev.
>>1912996My neighborhood gas station got demolished. Where it stood is now the parking lot for an office building.
>>1915021That article does not address that most of the new power is from renewables, which from what I have read, are not conducive to grid stability due to their environmental conditions (windy/sunny or not) and a lack of inertia to maintain grid frequency. The amount of renewable power added over time also corresponds with the trend of an increasing number of power outages in the US, and solar doesn't work well everywhere as very cold and very hot climates are not friendly to panel lifetime or the weather just blocks the sun for long periods of time.Eventually energy will not be cheap AND reliable, but one of the two, or we start building more fossil fueled (nat-gas most likely) or nuclear plants that will drive the cost back up, especially once disposal of renewable sources come into play.There is also the issue that the article does not account for the cost of overhauling not just the grid, but the heating and cooling systems of the entire nation, in just 20 years. There are no mentions of cost anywhere in the article for what amounts to adding a lot of storage to both power and heating/cooling and an integrated network to control all of the devices.Then it also assumes that people will cooperate with the correct charging times instead of charging whenever they want or just not upgrading to these new systems. Even if the new systems are cheaper to run, that may not offset the extra space or the costs to install them, which seem to be both private and public.I don't see it happening; at least not with this government and these citizens.>>1915022Short of new high temperature reactor designs to thermally disassociate water into hydrogen and water, the only good source of hydrogen is from natural gas, so we might as well just keep using oil/diesel/gasoline with hybrids.
>>1915017>This means it takes 40 to 50 hours to charge the typical EV 80% of its capacity using the standard 120 Vac outlet (what most homes have) and then you're still limited to 16 to 40 miles for a night's charging, which isn't really enough for going to work and running errands, especially if you have a long commute, no charging outlet at work, or live in hot or cold weather (all bad for batteries).The average driver does 37 miles per day. https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/#miles-per-dayIt's enough for most but not all. >>1915037>Short of new high temperature reactor designs to thermally disassociate water into hydrogen and water, the only good source of hydrogen is from natural gas, so we might as well just keep using oil/diesel/gasoline with hybrids.Whoa, someone who isn't a retard about the hydrogen meme.
>>1915057Is it though? Everyone states some figure around 37 miles a day on average, but is that including people who have a car but don't use it often?I have found a source that say Americans commute 41 miles a day to work on average, but 75% of them drive to work alone. Picrel.Source: https://www.zippia.com/advice/average-commute-time-statistics/I cannot seem to find a breakdown of average driving times anywhere (as in, X% drive this much, Y% drive this much, etc.), so I have to wonder if that figure is skewed by a portion of car owners who don't drive often, or if the DoT just divides the sum of driven miles by the sum of car owners.
>>1915057"The average driver goes 37 miles a day" doesn't mean "the average driver only ever goes 37 miles" though, dumbass. It means the average driver goes ~30 miles most days, 100 miles a few times a month, and 500+ miles a few times a year. Just because you *usually* don't go more than 37 miles away doesn't mean it's a good idea for your vehicle to only be capable of 40 miles. You *usually* don't have to carry more than a few bags of groceries but if you ever need to move furniture or appliances around you'll be glad to have some extra space.
>>1915068Are most people "average" though, or is the data skewed by people who drive less?If you had a group of 50 people with 35 of them driving 60 miles a day and the others driving only 5 miles a day, the average miles driven per day per driver would be 43.5 miles a day despite having 70% of the group driving over 43.5 miles per day.So are most people in the USA driving only ~37 miles a day on average, or are there outliers (such as people who don't drive much, but have a car) that pull down the average? If so, then most people probably need more range than the typical EV can deliver; if most drivers are average, then EVs are probably enough for most people.
>>1915074>then most people probably need more range than the typical EV can deliverOr rather, more charging than their home can deliver.
>>1915067It's an average. It has to be. >>1915068You keep parroting an absolutist paradigm. They can both exist, and they both have their use cases. It doesn't have to be either/or. >Just because you *usually* don't go more than 37 miles away doesn't mean it's a good idea for your vehicle to only be capable of 40 miles. You *usually* don't have to carry more than a few bags of groceries but if you ever need to move furniture or appliances around you'll be glad to have some extra space.The one time a year you need a truck, you can rent one. That entire infrastructure already exists. Are you the guy spending thousands more on transportation than he needs because of the one time you might use it?
>>1915075>Or rather, more charging than their home can deliver.200 A service is standard for single family residences. For the cost of gas for the equivalent vehicle for the year ($2k), you can get an electrician to give you nearly 10kW charging capability with an L14-50.
>>1915067>I have found a source that say Americans commute 41 miles a day to work on averageLmfao there's no fucking way that's true
>>1915037>That article does not address that most of the new power is from renewables,Yes it does, you just didn't read the article because you're a mentally ill bullshitter.
>>1912994The answer happened in the 1990s and 00s in America. Old locations unable to update tanks sold out and became other businesses. Back in the day if you went to exxon or chevron or bp it was owned by them. There were owner operators of independent stations but the nice ones were company owned.Then the EPA mandated a new type of fuel tank for storage with a changeover of about 1 million per station that has 3 tanks. There was a ten year period to get it done. So the major oil companies all spun off the real estate and turned them into franchises. Those debtless entities then built new and bigger stations with their money and demolished and sold older locations. Thus we sit today with independent places run by immigrants, and regionals like buckees, cum n go, or qt with big bucks to make mega stores. These places are easily demolished and resold if the tanks arent leaking. If they are leaking the buyer takes the property having to mitigate the damage and get EPA passed. This is common when buying old service stations and dry cleaners and is expensive but nbd.t. Worked for a regional service station corporate
>>1915017>This means it takes 40 to 50 hours to charge the typical EV 80% of its capacity using the standard 120 Vac outlet (what most homes haveThis is where your assumption fails. A level 2 charging port is standard for new US builds and is easy to retrofit. Its the same type circuit you run your dryer and washer on so they just install a second one easy peazy
>>1915079>It's an average. It has to be.Yes, I agree the average is an average, but how many drivers are close to this average?There could be a lot of drivers who drive more than 37 miles a day with a few car owners driving a lot less and thus results in an average well below what most people drive.I am basically asking for something similar to the r value found with linear regression, but there is no data (that I can find) that breaks down this average we can compare.>>1915084Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it?Your article says that the US power capacity grew by 20% from 30 years ago, and that all of the new extra power that will be added will be solar; it does not say that that 20% growth was due to renewables nor does it address the problems that renewables have regarding grid stability.>>1915083Unlike Forbes, they list their sources; feel free to look at them.
>>1915080>>1915089Most people do not run their dryer nor washer every day though; the average 208/240 volt line is likely not rated to carry enough current to charge an EV (or two) at most of the homes it connects to. An upgrade of most lines' capacities would be needed for widespread EV usage.
>>1915091It's 200 A service. That's 48 kW total. Your dryer is 30 A and your oven is 30 or 40 A. Air conditioning units are 30 or 40 A. All of this is the same as an L2 charger. You could even get a 50 A charger if you wanted.
>>1915090>There could be a lot of drivers who drive more than 37 miles a day with a few car owners driving a lot less and thus results in an average well below what most people drive.That doesn't work. In order for some drivers to skew the average up, many, many more drivers have to do substantially less than the average.
>>1915091Thats what im sayingThey put a second one in new builds. A retrofit isnt that bad at all.You cant run washer and dryer and ev on the same circuit.
>>1915091You are simply wrong. Its easy to install. Its $1500 with labor. My neighbor put one in.
>>1915098Not according to math. See >>1915074 for example.>>1915097>>1915100>>1915101I am talking about the mains line that distributes power from the grid to all of the homes it connects to, not the switchboard limit in your home.I don't think EV chargers were accounted for when designing the power limit of most of the 208/240 volt mains lines; most EV owners will be charging their car at the same time when they get home, while most people do not run their washers/dryers/ovens every day, let alone at the same times.
>>1915106Yes, there will have to be a grid upgrade. It will cost the equivalent of what we paid for the war on terror yearly for about 10 to 15 years. But unlike building bridges in Iraq building a new grid for ohio or california keeps good union jobs here and our people will actually appreciate it
>>1915106>>1915107I also hear the next grid overhaul is going to ideally be upstream and downstream allowing solar panel people to just sell power to the electic company and eliminate the need for batteries at the house.
I think the powergrid doomers are just searching for the last straw they can grasp. EV sales are going to keep up their logarithmic growth and we're going to power them because most Americans don't even drive >50 miles a day.
>>1915111Uh, wouldn't logarithmic growth would imply that the rate of EV sales is falling?
>>1915107I do agree that US money is better spent on US infrastructure, but I'm not sure EV specific stuff should be the priority.>>1915108Can't this be done already? I recall Hawaii's grid managers begging people not to install more solar because it was messing up their power plant utilization a lot.
>>1915113It would imply the rate of *increase* of EV sales is falling.Once you graduate middle school you'll learn to read graphs.
>>1915106>I don't think EV chargers were accounted for when designing the power limit of most of the 208/240 volt mains lines;Neither were air conditioners or electric dryers.
>>1915115>EV sales are going to keep up their logarithmic growthNo mention of rate, but still retarded; if you're saying that the rate is undergoing logarithmic growth, that would also imply that the number of EV cars will continue to climb forever, well past the point of everyone owning one or more EV.>>1915116Even less remaining capacity then.
Most people charge at night, when power usage is lowest, so it won't overload the grid.
>>1915120>if you're saying that the rate is undergoing logarithmic growth, that would also imply that the number of EV cars will continue to climb forever, well past the point of everyone owning one or more EV.Lol are cagetrolls this retarded?You can undergo logarithmic growth for a period of time and then stop.I'm starting to think cagetrolls didn't graduate elementary school.
>>1915121Most of the large domestic loads are not run constantly, so the main line supplying all of the houses on it doesn't need to be as big as if they were constantly running. With EVs it is doubtful whether this line could sustain simultaneous charging of an EV at each home.
>>1915122Probably should specify that then, rather than double down and look like a retard trying to use terms they don't understand.
>>1915124You're the one who didn't understand.You just keep digging yourself in a whole dude.EV sales will continue their logarithmic growth. Go cry.
>>1915126>EV sales will continue their logarithmic growth. Go cry.Lol, from mirth maybe.
>>1915123>Most of the large domestic loads are not run constantlyThe largest domestic loads are HVAC, refrigeration, and water heating.
>>1915135Do those run constantly for hours or do they run intermittently?
>>1915011>>1915015>seething poor urbanites cannot comprehend the purpose of the privately owned automobileMany such cases. Sad!
>>1915014Because communism doesn't work.EV appliances are 100% political and forced into the market.
>>1915169Oh good morning germutt!
>>1915057>>1915080>>1915089EV appliances have failed.This won't happen with normal cars.
>>1915122Growth is gone because EV appliances cannot exist in a free market. With no government subsidies people revert back to technologically superior combustion.
>>1915171Good morning seething poor brown.
>>1915126>Already the majority of cars are EV in Norway and Sweden>1 in 3 are ev in China, Europe and UK Anti electric guys don't know they've already lost
>>1915183It's kinda sad. It's like anti renewable guys, they stick to the internet having the same arguments they had in 2004. Not realising the world has moved passed them and moved forward.
>>1915137My air conditioner uses about 1.3 MWh in the hottest month of the year. There are days where it runs 12-14 hours at a time.
>>1915197>muh renewablesWhat will you do when there's no sun?What will you do when there's no wind?Simple as.
>>1914082>Investing in nuclear companiesLOL! LMAO even!
>>1912994you could house all the homeless in them they're all going to be converted to trendy homes, very chic. Imagine the string lights and patio setups you can have. I'd love to live in an old gas station holy shit.
>>1915263Actually putting some tiny homes on them doesn't seem like a bad idea.
EV are mostly worthless, hybrids are more efficient. Steam would be even better.
>>1912994Depends on the needs of the market.Some close. Some get boarded up. Some get bulldozed outright.Some get converted to marijuana dispensaries.Some get converted to convenience stores. Which is to say, the same exact thing but with the pumps turned off or even physically removed.Some get converted into a front for a llantera and a taco truck. I got cheap tires there and that is not a criticism. I got a great deal.A better question is, "What is the best way to gloat about forcing poorfags to ride the bus while blaming them for it?"
>>1915612>A better question is, "What is the best way to gloat about forcing poorfags to ride the bus while blaming them for it?"Why is that?EVs are as affordable as ICEs currently, and they'll get even more affordable in the future.They're also more reliable and cheaper to fuel.
>>1915618There isn't a charging solution for the rental class.
If the abandoned gas station is located in a mixed-use, walkable (aka desirable) neighborhood, it can be feasibly redeveloped.If it's located out in the middle of a bunch of sprawl where land is cheap and undesirable, it'll just be an eyesore for decades.
>>1915628>it'll just be an eyesore for decades.No need for hysterics
>>1915628>muh walkable desirableKek have fun walking
>>1915638See >>1913773Abandoned gas stations sit empty as eyesores for decades because the pollution is so costly to clean up. That's the sad reality of car infrastructure.
>>1915643>Some guy's blog is the truthDifferent factors are at play as to why gas stations sit unused. The landlord could be asking for rent that is too high. The area might not be economically viable anymore. There could be newer and better stations nearby that the old station couldn't compete with, and so forth.A cursory search on the subject revealed soil remediation isn't prohibitively expensive, there are even EPA grants for it. Requirements vary so much by city and state that using a hysterical argument that it can't be done is simply ridiculous.As usual you just see what you want to. 99.99% of closed gas stations don't sit abandoned for decades as you claim.
>>1912994Turned into McDonalds / KFCs / Starbucks or whatever. By their very nature, they are usually placed in prime locations for passing cars.
>>1915650See >>1913096Gas stations leak gasoline into the ground, which is very costly to clean up. The land can't be sold until it's cleaned up. Therefore the gas station sits empty for years.You should try learning about it sometime.
>>1915667You never had any sources, unfortunately. You just posted conjecture and failed to back it up with anything.Gas stations always leak gasoline into the ground and it's always expensive to clean up.That's why there are so many abandoned gas stations across America, and they sit abandoned for years.
>>1915669>You never had any sources, unfortunately.I did a search for it and one result was the EPA's website.>Gas stations always leak gasoline into the groundSource?>it's always expensive to clean up.Source?>That's why there are so many abandoned gas stations across AmericaSource?>and they sit abandoned for years.Source?
>>1915669>sourcesPost yours instead some random retards blog. >That's why there are so many abandoned gas stationsCitation needed.
>WHY SELLERS HAVE TROUBLE WITH FORMER GAS STATION LOCATIONS.>Because locations that served at gas stations are usually located on busy street corners and easy to access, you would think that they are prime real estate for developers. However, this isn’t usually the case. This is because former gas stations are almost always considered contaminated sites.>Across the country, many prime retail locations remain vacant because they were previously gas stations. The sites of former gas stations often remain on the market for many years because gasoline from underground tanks seeps into the ground, contaminating the property. The cost and time needed to remediate these sites are extensive, often requiring millions of dollars and several years before a site is declared safe.https://ccrasocal.com/why-its-challenging-to-sell-locations-that-were-previously-gas-stations/
>>1915680The land isn't too expensive to clean up. It's just slightly more expensive than buying nearby land that doesn't require soil remediation.Closed gas stations aren't a crisis. I seldom see them. What a flippant thing to latch on to.
>Empty former gas station lots number in the thousands, many in prime locations – corners of prominent intersections in cities and towns across the country. But extensive soil contamination, requiring cleanup that can take years at great cost, is often a tall hurdle to overcome even in the midst of the booming Canadian real-estate market.>“It’s certainly the norm, and not the exception, that the environmental cost exceeds the value of the land,” says Greg Quandt, vice-president with Hemmera, an Oakville, Ont.-based consulting firm with extensive remediation experience.>however, thousands of sites remain vacant, including many in high-profile locations in established neighbourhoods where land for mixed-use development is at a premium, Mr. Quandt says.>Although dozens of sites are redeveloped annually, the numbers do not keep pace with the trend of several hundred others closing over the past three decades, says Jason Parent, vice-president with Kent Group, a consultant for the industry.>“We do a census of sites across Canada, and the number of stations has gone from more than 20,000 in 1989 to about 12,000,” Mr. Parent says.>Many remain vacant because of remediation costs, and some in rural areas may never be redeveloped without incentive programs, Mr. Simpkins says.https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/property-report/life-after-corner-gas-the-challenges-of-developing-old-service-stations/article32219739/
>>1915680>>1915688Here comes that one anon actually doing the work and ass blasting every cageshill in this thread.
>>1915688>>1915689Some story from Canada written in 2016, plus samefagging
>>1915694>samefaggingI legitimatelly can't imagine what has to be going inside your head to make you think someone would willingly work on two devices to shill gas station remediation subsidies faster.
>>1915689>CAGE CAGE CAGE REEEEEEECope more seething poor. In my area there have been multiple changes in ownership of gas stations without a single fucking issue and legislation here is MUCH stricter in EU.
>>1915697It's really obvious. You need to learn how to be more subtle if you're going to do it.
>>1915699Your thought pattern is a bit concerning. You've never seen someone throw a quick variation of "I agree" to someone else on this site?
>>1915701Cagetrolls think there's only one person on the train board who likes trains.But I think they're just accusing you of samefagging so they can litter the thread with off-topic posts after they got proven wrong.
>>1915698>multiple changes in ownership of gas stationsThat's not repurposing the land. It's still a gas station.
>>1915701>>1915705I like trains too, that's why I post on /n/, I just realize that in the US their best use is for freight... you won't see me samefagging about it though.
>>1915706That german retard is never able to formulate a coherent argument.
>>1915706>It's still a gas station.What's the problem with that? You don't like it? Too bad.
>>1915717The whole point of the thread is hypothetical gas station land repurposing, retard.
>>1915721>But they didn't put in something I like!That's your problem. Too bad.
Because so many gas stations have been closing down and are going to continue to close down, they're going to be a blight on the landscape for a long time.Smart states will enact programs for cleaning up their contamination to help remediate the costs, but in shitty states like Oklahoma or Alabama you're just gonna see them sit empty and deteriorate.
>>1915748The EPA already has a grant program to clean up USTs.>but in shitty states like Oklahoma or Alabama you're just gonna see them sit empty and deteriorate.Those states have their own agencies and legislation that meets or exceeds federal regulations to deal with USTs.