this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2026
423 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
86046 readers
3838 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And a rapid move to electric cars and the revoking of solar and wind incentives.
Electric cars aren't as big of a strain on the grid as big oil and gas would have you believe. Most people charge their car at home at slower speeds (compared to DCFC) and usually overnight when there's less power demand anyway. It's cheaper and more convenient this way, plus it flattens the duck curve which allows more stable and consistent generational load. I have a longer commute than most at about 90 miles round trip, and my monthly power usage is only up by about 300-400kWh/month. Average in VA is about 1100, but I was a bit below that before the EV at around 900-1000, now around 1300. That sounds like a lot but it really isn't. The power plant I operate generally puts out about 700MW, or 700,000kW. At that load, my plant could replenish the same commute as my car's needs for nearly 32,000 cars in only an hour, every hour. My home's entire month of above average power needs is met in an hour of operation... Along with over 500 homes with identical power needs.
I can't argue with you about revoking incentives for solar and wind. What a stupid fucking move. I'm not going to pretend that putting solar panels on my roof could've ever achieved net zero for my home, but I could've relieved some grid strain during the day while simultaneously investing in cheaper overall energy bills.
Speaking of cheaper energy bills, the EV also did that for me; electricity bill is $50-60 higher but I now have no reason to stop at a gas pump or pay for oil changes. Before gas prices spiked earlier this year, each commute in my RAV4 cost me about $10 in gas, plus some amount for maintenance that I'll just ignore for now. My commute when charging at home costs closer to $3.50. I'm saving about $100/month on fueling up. A lot of people have told me they'd never get an EV in a million years, and I get that it's not for everybody and I'm not forcing it on anybody, but for anybody with the ability to charge at home and who is generally just doing normal commutes and who is already looking to replace their car, I don't understand the aversion. If cost is the main factor, get a used one like I did since they're about half price, and stop looking at the luxury/sports models. If range anxiety is a factor, it shouldn't be one for most people. I limit my charge to 75% battery to extend my car's battery life, and my commute only drains it to like 30% even while blasting AC, and my car only has a max range of 250 miles when new! I even did a road trip last month and it was fine. I barely did any extra waiting to charge since we were already stopping for food or bathroom breaks anyway, even while my car's shitty 50kW charge rate (most modern cars can do at least 150, some around 350) left us with much longer charge times!
There's a ton of propaganda against EVs, and it really took getting one for me to see how ridiculous so much of it was. Used ones are gonna get more expensive and harder to find as the truth comes out.
I agree. On all points. It is a small effect.
However, 400kwh times 500+ cars in a town does begin to approach datacenter territory. My place is 16mw. My point is that other uses are ignored in the discussion of rising usage.
30 years ago, most houses in my town had 100 amp service. Now almost all have 200. I had to upgrade mine when I purchased it in 2015. Also, many folks here have mother-in-law suites, which means two kitchens and often an additional laundry room. Most forego gas and have all electric appliances and heat. Power usage is way up all over. Our society is moving forward and uses more than the projections of the 1980s. Power generation projects rarely get approved by locals all over. Especially nuclear. We have painted ourselves into a corner.
The thing to keep in mind with that 400kWh times 500 cars is that that is the amount of power used over the course of a month, but generated in an hour. My charger at home is set up on the beefiest breaker it can support at 240V 60A (but only using 48A because 80% rule for continuous load) charging at only ~11.5kW. So that 400kWh is trickled out across well over 30 hours.
It's a good thing that modern homes are electrifying. Rather than exploding things on site at individual homes, we have power plants do that at scale and send the electricity to the homes, which is more efficient. Even better if wind, solar, or hydro are used. Also, modern electric heat pumps are capable of being effectively like 500% efficient since they are manipulating energy spikes of phase change to move heat instead of making it.
Idk what you mean by your "place" being 16MW. Do you work at a power plant producing that or a data center using that or something else? In any case, the implication is that that 16MW is a rate of power, so at that continuous rate it would be 16MWh (16,000kWh) moved over the course of that hour. 16,000kWh every hour compared to my car needing an extra 11kWh in those hours that I'm plugged in.
I'd say that 500-1000MW is pretty average for a power plant that isn't wind, solar, or hydro. The nuclear plant I worked at before was 2 units, each about 900MW, so 1800MW total. And that plant was built in the 70s, so imagine what we could be doing with modern nuclear innovations if we would just fucking build some new plants. If we assume each home uses 1000kWh in a month with continuous power usage (unrealistic, but easy math to make a point so let me cook), then that one plant from the 70s can power 54,000 homes. Cut it in half to allow for spikes and that's still 27,000 homes. That plant also just used the bay it was built on for it's circ water system, so it doesn't even impact water use by much. Bay water came in, went through heat exchangers to condense steam, and carried that heat back to the bay where a lot of fish enjoyed the warmer water, and the fishers enjoyed the congregation spot lol.