gadfly56
Senior Member
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
Hat trick! You couldn't ask for a better, clearer answer.
Tesla Car Charger???
- Thread starter Dennis Alwon
- Start date
- Status
Hat trick! You couldn't ask for a better, clearer answer.
ggunn
PE (Electrical), NABCEP certified
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Occupation
- Consulting Electrical Engineer - Photovoltaic Systems
Just because they haven't yet doesn't mean they never will. With gasoline trending toward $1/gal it won't happen for a while, and the emerging tech behind them obviously needs more development, but if you take the long view it's virtually inevitable.
wwhitney
Senior Member
- Location
- Berkeley, CA
- Occupation
- Retired
Terminology: charger is the device that provides the specific voltage/current profile DC needed to charge the battery. This is built into the car.
The device you are installing on the wall is an EVSE, you could call it a "charging station" or "charge cord" or whatever you like. It's basically a GFCI, a contactor, and a signal generator to tell the car how much current it can safely draw.
Cheers, Wayne
- Location
- Massachusetts
In short, money.
Exactly, as soon as gas gets to scarce / expensive EVs will take over.
Money is the reality.
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
gadfly56
Senior Member
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
No where does the Constitution permit Congress to regulate light bulbs. Interest groups in cahoots with the EPA have finessed the Commerce Clause to gin up a fig leaf of justification. The federal powers are pretty clearly and narrowly enumerated, all other powers being reserved to the people and the states.:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
When the Constitution was first ratified, everything not permitted the Federal government was forbidden to it. Now it seems that anything not forbidden is permitted, and darn little in the minds of politicians seems forbidden. If you had asked the Founding Fathers if Congress had the power to, say, regulate the size of candle a man could burn in his house, they likely would have considered you a candidate for the local loony bin.
With respect, I don't think it's just money. It's inconvenience.
An example from here, UK.
A couple of years ago, my wife and I went to Cornwall on holiday. From where we live, Dunstable, it would have required two ten hour stops charging from a standard outlet. Each way. In a Nissan Leaf. Not convenient at all.
Thank you kindly.
jumper
Senior Member
- Location
- 3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
I thought you lived in Watford.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
- Location
- Massachusetts
As the cost of fuel increases the level of inconvenience you (or at least normal humans
) are willing to tolerate will increase.jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
So the states or the people may regulate light bulbs and other consumption and production of energy. Thanks for bolstering my point.
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
jumper
Senior Member
- Location
- 3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
gadfly56
Senior Member
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
So the states or the people may regulate light bulbs and other consumption and production of energy. Thanks for bolstering my point.
Not really. If New York decided to regulate light bulbs, or Albany within New York, not a problem (however stupid). "the people" in that clause does not include the Feds, otherwise the clause itself would make no sense.
Yes, lived. Note past tense.
ggunn
PE (Electrical), NABCEP certified
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Occupation
- Consulting Electrical Engineer - Photovoltaic Systems
I agree that CFLs are a poor means of providing illumination. I also agree that there is much with which to be dissatisfied in the way the US government works, or rather, does not work, but the light bulb issue is very small potatoes. Get over it and move on to LEDs.
gadfly56
Senior Member
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
Constitutional issues aside, I have many of the same objections to LED's as I do CLF's. My personal experience with CLF's is that they last about a year in normal service, well under the originally promised life of seven (7) years or about 21,000 hours. As a result, the replacement costs overwhelm the operational savings. I'd like to see some real-world data on lifetimes for LED's. In addition, others on this site have alluded to the fact that there is a roll-off in output, something incandescents don't have to any significant degree. What's a typical roll-off curve going to look like? Is life based on some arbitrary limit such as 70% of installed brightness or when you get the last glimmer out of a bulb? In my view, LED's are too close to bleeding edge technology as far as general consumer lighting is concerned.
ggunn
PE (Electrical), NABCEP certified
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Occupation
- Consulting Electrical Engineer - Photovoltaic Systems
I have had mixed results from CFLs but all the LEDs I have installed are doing great. I have had CFLs fail after only a year or two; my oldest LED is about six years old and it shows no signs of deterioration.
gadfly56
Senior Member
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
OK, I'll accept your experience with LED lifetimes as one data point, especially as your results with CFL's tracks mine, suggesting we have similar operating conditions.
How about lamp brightness? Not to be too geeky, but did you by any chance take measurements with a light meter when new and track any changes over time?
- Status