EV-based road transportation is not viable

[tszaboo]

Way more sense than converting electricity to hydrogen, compressing it in heavy tanks, transporting it by road to a filling station, putting it in a car, where a fuel cell containing expensive metals like platinum converts it back to electricity with maybe 30% end-to-end efficiency. 

Compare that to sending energy down existing wires, right to the home of the users, where they can not only fill up while they sleep, but potentially also use their cars as a backup supply and help stabilise the grid.

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

[james_s]

Well Philips released plenty of LED lamps when cheap CCFLs were about,  they were like $50 each though so the power efficiency benefit didn't really make sense.   IIRC the first was released in around 2007 with  that weird external phosphor which makes the bulb yellow when off. (This didn't prove that popular with consumers but it does look kinda neat to have a yellow bulb light up white.)

I have a bunch of those, I was paying $40 each at the time and they were the first practical LED bulbs I owned. A few are still in service though I've retired most of them due to poor efficiency. They're 12.5 watts for 800 lumens and most bulbs now are around 8W for that same output and run cooler so they are better suited to enclosed fixtures. The tri-lobe Philips remote phosphor bulbs were very innovative at the time though. They were  WAY better than CFL though, instant on, dimmable, better light quality, initially I started replacing CFLs as they failed but eventually I ended up replacing all of them as LED bulb prices came down. It was a technology I believed in and wanted to succeed so I didn't mind paying a premium as an early adopter.

[james_s]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

[vad]

If people just left it alone and let the market decide rather than trying to force things this sort of ridiculousness wouldn't happen.

but if we're going to try to switch people to EV we're going to need something

What happened to liberalism and Adam Smith’s invisible hand in just 3 minutes?

[CatalinaWOW]

I've only spot read this listing so these comments may be redundant.

Several here are complaining about vehicle costs of EVs and infrastructure costs to support them, and suggesting hydrogen as the solution.  What makes anyone think that installing a hydrogen infrastructure from the ground up is going to be cheaper than upgrading the electrical grid?  Unless you count the land and building at existing petrol sales sites there is exactly zero existing hydrogen infrastructure.  All the tanks, pipelines, transport trucks (if that proves necessary and practical) and dispensing systems have to be invented and installed.  I see no reason to see this as a low cost infrastructure option.  You can argue that a hydrogen vehicle would be comparable in cost or perhaps slightly lower in cost than a current ICE.  But that assumes that the reduced fuel management and emission control costs exceed the increased tankage costs.  There will be some emissions controls if air is used to combust the hydrogen, just as there are on current ICEs to control oxides of nitrogen.  That comparable cost won't happen in the first years of availability.  The whole issue will not be known until we produce quantities of hydrogen cars comparable to current ICE cars.

Comments about high density urban settings making charging difficult are correct, but may be aiming at the totally wrong solution.  In those environments any kind of vehicle is probably not the best option.  While they allow for occasional long trips the answer there is probably the same as that given by EV proponents to drivers who like most people travel short distances most of the time but occasionally finds very long range desirable.  Rent a vehicle for those occasions.

[james_s]

If people just left it alone and let the market decide rather than trying to force things this sort of ridiculousness wouldn't happen.

but if we're going to try to switch people to EV we're going to need something

What happened to liberalism and Adam Smith’s invisible hand in just 3 minutes?

You've either misunderstood my quote or deliberately pulled it out of context to alter its meaning.

Currently we rely on a fuel tax to pay for road maintenance. EVs don't use fuel so obviously we're going to need something besides a fuel tax to pay for the roads, yes? Currently that is an additional $150 annual EV tax, but that is not an ideal solution since it has no connection to how much a person drives, which the fuel tax does. Now what does any of that have to do with liberalism or free market capitalism? Taxes are a necessary evil, roads cost money, ideally we want to tax people based on how much they use the roads. Currently EVs break that structure.

[jonovid]

 the level of social engineering suggested is unavailable. control freaks.
electricity is already expensive , who would call for more tax just to sell more of it.
is this an EV cult?  technology sells its itself.  we have choice.

[tautech]

Currently we rely on a fuel tax to pay for road maintenance. EVs don't use fuel so obviously we're going to need something besides a fuel tax to pay for the roads, yes? Currently that is an additional $150 annual EV tax, but that is not an ideal solution since it has no connection to how much a person drives, which the fuel tax does. Now what does any of that have to do with liberalism or free market capitalism? Taxes are a necessary evil, roads cost money, ideally we want to tax people based on how much they use the roads. Currently EVs break that structure.

It's one hell of a mess here.

New ICE vehicles got lumbered with additional taxes of some arbitrary sliding scale based of fuck knows what penalising many tradespeople as their normal runaround is not available in an EV and in some cases these 'fit for purpose' vehicles new price increased between $5-10k allow subsidization of EV's and them hybrid things.

If the frustration that taxing 'fit for purpose' vehicles wasn't enough EV's are currently getting a totally free ride contributing NOTHING back towards maintaining roading infrastructure ! Not one cent !

But we do have a perfectly fit for purpose road user charges system (RUC) for all diesel vehicles as diesel fuels in NZ are exempt from excise taxes for roading infrastructure. This for small vehicles works with a mileage charge based on GVW or for larger tucks etc axle loadings and configurations.

To further complicate matters, here in NZ where the bulk of our power comes from renewables, namely hydro, and our winters cannot be described as severe but 3 times in 2022 our national grid operator warned power retailers to reduce usage or brownouts or cuts would follow.

And still our gubbermint blindly pushes EV's pissing off so many tradies and risking potentially overloading the NZ grid while these EV bludgers contribute zip to NZ roading infrastructure.
Just tonights news proudly proclaimed NZ had reached the dizzying heights of 25% of new sales were EV's and little wonder why, they are getting a free ride on the rest of us ! 

Sadly these children that run this place have rocks in their heads if someone as dumb as I can see the bigger picture stemming from recent facts they seem totally blind to. 

[MadScientist]

If people just left it alone and let the market decide rather than trying to force things this sort of ridiculousness wouldn't happen.

but if we're going to try to switch people to EV we're going to need something

What happened to liberalism and Adam Smith’s invisible hand in just 3 minutes?

You've either misunderstood my quote or deliberately pulled it out of context to alter its meaning.

Currently we rely on a fuel tax to pay for road maintenance. EVs don't use fuel so obviously we're going to need something besides a fuel tax to pay for the roads, yes? Currently that is an additional $150 annual EV tax, but that is not an ideal solution since it has no connection to how much a person drives, which the fuel tax does. Now what does any of that have to do with liberalism or free market capitalism? Taxes are a necessary evil, roads cost money, ideally we want to tax people based on how much they use the roads. Currently EVs break that structure.

Here the dept of finance has already released a discussion document. They favour a move away from car taxes based on engine or fuel and prefer a road pricing strategy those that use roads more pay more

Bev usage will be taxed that’s for sure

[MadScientist]

My local plumber uses a Nissan ev200 Bev van seems quite pleased , one of the local courier companies also has switched to Bev the national post office is phasing in Bev vans

The trade can find solutions

[tautech]

My local plumber uses a Nissan ev200 Bev van seems quite pleased , one of the local courier companies also has switched to Bev the national post office is phasing in Bev vans

The trade can find solutions

Dream on.

Not all business is done on hard pavements in the city.
Take a rural contractor, he doesn't just require 4wd, it's a must ! And he needs carry 500kg and tow 1-2 ton...every day !
This ^^^ is just basic everyday life here and the tools (wheels) we need to just do our jobs are being taxed unfairly, so much so there have been nationwide protests and still these children that run this place don't give a stuff.
You've got a gas guzzler so we must penalize you for that !

Thank gawd there's an election here later this year and we can send these fuckwits back to kindergarten where hopefully second time around they might learn something.

[james_s]

the level of social engineering suggested is unavailable. control freaks.
electricity is already expensive , who would call for more tax just to sell more of it.
is this an EV cult?  technology sells its itself.  we have choice.

Depends on where you are. I pay 10.1c/kWh, that's pretty cheap really, my average electricity bill is under $50/mo.

[MadScientist]

My local plumber uses a Nissan ev200 Bev van seems quite pleased , one of the local courier companies also has switched to Bev the national post office is phasing in Bev vans

The trade can find solutions

Dream on.

Not all business is done on hard pavements in the city.
Take a rural contractor, he doesn't just require 4wd, it's a must ! And he needs carry 500kg and tow 1-2 ton...every day !
This ^^^ is just basic everyday life here and the tools (wheels) we need to just do our jobs are being taxed unfairly, so much so there have been nationwide protests and still these children that run this place don't give a stuff.
You've got a gas guzzler so we must penalize you for that !

That gawd there's an election here later this year and we can send these fuckwits back to kindergarten where hopefully second time around they might learn something.

Firstly trade users have generous business tax allowances to offset vehicle costs, hence the real level of business tax is low , in my country it’s 12.5% .

Hence the Bev trade argument is nonsense. If a Bev suits it’s suiys and increasing as battery tech improves it will suit more and more non personal situations

Just like smoking and cancer the debate is over. For several reasons burning dino juice in a 19th bag of bolts engine is “ over “ face the facts. Your approach is like climate deniers , persisting in an argument that’s clearly is over

I was on a gov working group ( I was secretary of a Bev ngo ) on Bev adoption , in reality the grid arguments are all
 Completely obercomable over the typical 20-30 year changeover timescales the charging issue is simply not an issue once you dig into the real issues

The car industry has decided that there’s no future in Ice engines . Deal with it just like steam engines ICE is a dodo

All these issues raised are akin to “ miss miss thd cat ate my homework “ when you look at the times scales.  Look at the transition process and look at the big changes coming in societies attitude to frivolous personal car journeys   , there’s no doubt that tranisition to electric vehicles is underway and unstoppable

Trivial makey up arguments will simply fall by the way side as more and more people convert to a Bev future

[tom66]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

I think this is most likely to be part of the future, but given EVs can be charged at virtually any time, they will remain dominant.  You would only need to store around 1-2 weeks of gas to produce electricity if you had a well-sized renewable energy supply (~2-3x normal demand.)  Europe stores a huge amount of gas presently because the formerly operational pipelines to Russia would never be able to support peak winter demands.  That can be avoided with production within the continent.

The stored gas would be used for power generation and legacy heating (where heating is not yet replaced with heat pumps, like old houses.)  Power to gas for methane is one candidate but it might be more efficient to use ammonia as it can be used for fertilisation.  Ammonia is also liquid at a higher temperature than methane so it may be more practical/cheaper to transport it longer distances, and like hydrogen fuel it burns without any carbon dioxide so there is never the question of carbon balance, it is just neutral to start with.  But unlike hydrogen there is no need to desalinate water in its production.

Whatever the gas used, ideally the majority of the gas would be produced on site to maximise efficiency. So you might see a wind farm near the coast of a country, with a production facility of some kind of synthetic gas on land, storing that gas deep underground.  The facility could, ideally, be reversible or well connected to the grid, so it can either directly produce electricity from the stored gas or export that gas.  At the same time, pricing signals drop the cost of electricity to a low level, encouraging users of EVs and other time-shiftable load (aluminum smelting for instance) to utilise the cheap electricity. It's always going to be more efficient to use that electricity immediately than to produce fuel.

Edit: typos, typos, typos.

[tszaboo]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

Yes, they are already building plants with 500MW capacity, 2TW ones are under planning. Round trip efficiency is about 70-80%, but it's seasonal storage. Plus, you know, just get more cheap solar.
Germany is investing a lot into this technology. The numbers change from year to year, but I think the recent plans are 200BEUR in the next 5 years.

[tautech]

Just like smoking and cancer the debate is over. For several reasons burning dino juice in a 19th bag of bolts engine is “ over “ face the facts. Your approach is like climate deniers , persisting in an argument that’s clearly is over

You face the facts !

I care little what working junkets/groups you've been on when living in some other reality when your input into the future changes how professionals with decades of careful selection of tools (vehicles) to accomplish tasks in the most efficient way !
These efficiencies are still not met with EV's and it will be a while until they can be and most likely not with current technologies.
Still the world is being steered by do gooders with little sense or knowledge of how the world outside a city really operates. 
We could debate the Paris Accord where it firmly state any remedy imposed on rural food production is not to impact on it. Please offer an EV solution that meets Article 2 and not impose higher costs on the rural sector.

[tggzzz]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

Yes, they are already building plants with 500MW capacity, 2TW ones are under planning. Round trip efficiency is about 70-80%, but it's seasonal storage. Plus, you know, just get more cheap solar.

You appear to be confusing power (MW) with energy (MWh). We already have a 1700MW plant - but it can only supply that for 5 hours.

That's the largest pumped storage in the UK, but a 30GWh plant is planned for 2030.

[tggzzz]

Just like smoking and cancer the debate is over. For several reasons burning dino juice in a 19th bag of bolts engine is “ over “ face the facts. Your approach is like climate deniers , persisting in an argument that’s clearly is over

You face the facts !

I care little what working junkets/groups you've been on when living in some other reality when your input into the future changes how professionals with decades of careful selection of tools (vehicles) to accomplish tasks in the most efficient way !
These efficiencies are still not met with EV's and it will be a while until they can be and most likely not with current technologies.
Still the world is being steered by do gooders with little sense or knowledge of how the world outside a city really operates. 
We could debate the Paris Accord where it firmly state any remedy imposed on rural food production is not to impact on it. Please offer an EV solution that meets Article 2 and not impose higher costs on the rural sector.

Before anybody bothers to reply to MadScientist, they may find it beneficial to look at his other posts (via the profile).

Here's one I read 5mins ago; IMNSHO there are many others.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/(discharged)-super-capacitor-in-checked-luggage-on-airplane/msg4645081/#msg4645081

[tszaboo]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

Yes, they are already building plants with 500MW capacity, 2TW ones are under planning. Round trip efficiency is about 70-80%, but it's seasonal storage. Plus, you know, just get more cheap solar.

You appear to be confusing power (MW) with energy (MWh). We already have a 1700MW plant - but it can only supply that for 5 hours.

That's the largest pumped storage in the UK, but a 30GWh plant is planned for 2030.

Why would I confuse it? A 500MW plant will use 500MW to generate CH4 of H2 from excess power. It's not supplying that power, it is using that power to make gas. You can pump the gas to a regular gas fired power plant to burn it later.
The upper limit of the storage capacity (the MWh) is enormous, because it can use the national gas storage tanks. The gas storage is something like 1000 TWh in Europe as I recall. And the plants need to be large because there will be a limited time that they will operate, probably only a few hours per day during summer initially. Or maybe ever. I really don't know what's the economics around battery bank vs just building bigger P2G plants. Or maybe continue to work during the night with cheap nuclear energy.

[nctnico]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

Yes, they are already building plants with 500MW capacity, 2TW ones are under planning. Round trip efficiency is about 70-80%, but it's seasonal storage. Plus, you know, just get more cheap solar.

You appear to be confusing power (MW) with energy (MWh). We already have a 1700MW plant - but it can only supply that for 5 hours.

That's the largest pumped storage in the UK, but a 30GWh plant is planned for 2030.

The one with the confusion is you  Wh = capacity. W = power transfer. For a plant you specify W as in throughput. For storage your specify Wh as in capacity.

[nctnico]

Way more sense than converting electricity to hydrogen, compressing it in heavy tanks, transporting it by road to a filling station, putting it in a car, where a fuel cell containing expensive metals like platinum converts it back to electricity with maybe 30% end-to-end efficiency. 

Compare that to sending energy down existing wires, right to the home of the users, where they can not only fill up while they sleep, but potentially also use their cars as a backup supply and help stabilise the grid.

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

It depends a bit on how it is used. When burned, there will still be NOx emissions. AFAIK you can use natural gas in a fuell cell as well but if your feedstock is hydrogen, then why not use it directly? The way I see it synthetic natural gas could be an intermediate step to keep existing equipment running but for new installations I'm not sure how it would work out financially. OTOH natural gas is likely cheaper & easier to store compared to hydrogen. So there are definitely pros & cons to consider between synthetic natural gas and hydrogen.

[tggzzz]

No. Filling up the tanks during the summer and using it all year round. Importing the gas from huge Australian solar farms, gigantic ships bringing fuel all across the globe. Offshore windfarms making gas on site. Power to gas will keep the industry going for then next half a century. House hating systems and power plants keep on working on this fuel, without replacing the entire infrastructure everywhere at the same time. I don't think it will be hydrogen, I think its methane but otherwise nctnico is right. Oh, and existing petrol cars converted to LNG becoming near zero emission with power to gas.

If they could synthesize methane using electricity that would be great but I don't know if that's even feasible? Certainly it's not going to appease the crowd that wants to ban fossil fuels since methane from a non-fossil source is still the same stuff that we are already burning in heating systems, cook stoves and power plants. LNG is feasible for cars and is probably a good option for things like semi trucks and buses, but I think for passenger cars we've already reached the tipping point for BEV and it's unlikely to go the other way back toward ICE. Engines are complex and maintenance intensive, most people that have lived with electric aren't going to want to go back to that.

Yes, they are already building plants with 500MW capacity, 2TW ones are under planning. Round trip efficiency is about 70-80%, but it's seasonal storage. Plus, you know, just get more cheap solar.

You appear to be confusing power (MW) with energy (MWh). We already have a 1700MW plant - but it can only supply that for 5 hours.

That's the largest pumped storage in the UK, but a 30GWh plant is planned for 2030.

The one with the confusion is you  Wh = capacity. W = power transfer. For a plant you specify W as in throughput. For storage your specify Wh as in capacity.

Er, that's what I wrote! Power in MW, energy in MWh.

The "plant" is the fixed installation with several characteristics. One characteristic of the Coire Glas plant will be storing 30GWh of energy; another will be 0.7GW or 1GW power output depending on which plan is accepted.

[NiHaoMike]

BEV cars are a good idea while society and the supporting infrastructure works but leave you up shit creek without a paddle when it collapses.

Nicely ignoring all the supporting infrastructure for gas cars, which is far more difficult to replicate at home. A plug in hybrid can use either, best option for preppers. The BMW i3 had the right idea of very decent all electric range, it's just overpriced like all BMWs are.

[nctnico]

BEV cars are a good idea while society and the supporting infrastructure works but leave you up shit creek without a paddle when it collapses.

Nicely ignoring all the supporting infrastructure for gas cars, which is far more difficult to replicate at home.

You have this the wrong way around. Charging at home is just a crutch due to lack of charging infrastructure. Charging at home or street level should never be a goal. It just doesn't scale well economically. Just look back at car history and you'll see why. The reason there are gas stations is that these work better compared to having a tank of gasoline in each home. You can still have a tank of gasoline at home; all you need to buy is a tank and a pump. I'm quite sure that you can find an oil company that comes over to fill it for you. However, once you get the bill (including delivery costs), you'll quickly see it is cheaper to go to a gas station. Economy of scale.

[Bud]

You can only store gasoline or diesel fuel for 6 months or something. It degrades at fast rate.