There is a nice video by Bjorn Nyland where he interviews a company (Elywhere) making a semi portable fast charger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTCyjm6TSOU

It convinced me that there can be a good business case for this. Instead of a diesel generator it uses batteries to install fast chargers in locations where the grid connection is weak. The batteries can be charged slowly at off peak prices then dump that power into cars whenever someone comes along.

Because that woupd stop the transition to wind/solar, or at least double the cost of it.

It’s likely because your assumptions aren’t accurate.

An inverter turns direct current into alternating current. A rectifier turns AC into DC. All generators output AC power. Even the alternator in an ICE car outputs 3 phase AC. It has a rectifier inside it that converts the AC into DC. The output post on the alternator comes directly off the rectifier.

Natural gas is relatively clean burning, as compared to coal and oil, but it still outputs greater co2 than other sources like solar, wind, nuclear, etc. If we’re going to spend the money to clean up our grid and meet future power demands, it’s better to start now at the source than try to bandaid it with generators.

That being said, there are companies that are doing generator based Level 3 chargers. There’s even self-contained units you can drop right in remote areas. Right now they go for around $250,000 for a 2-port 62 kw output setup, so it’s still not cheap.

What you are describing is building individual power plants for DCFC stations. These would need engineering, land, and regular maintenance. Just because the fuel is cheaper does not mean that they are cheaper. There is a reason people don’t power houses with natural gas.

Generally air emissions would prevent this in most developed areas. Unless you also install emissions reduction technologies, but now you’re talking more money and a full operation.

Noticed your note about natural gas, and it’s not as widely available as you’d expect. Plus I’m pretty sure the costs there have been surging as well. At least in California.

That would cost even more.

what you have just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.

When it comes to fuel-based power generation, centralized mass generation is always cleaner than distributed generation. The economies of scale are crazy. Even a modern coal burning plant would be cleaner and more efficient than a bunch of individual diesel generators at each DCFC location. Not to mention the noise and smell.

Reliance on diesel generators requires an operational license and monitoring & reporting in California. It can get costly.

No idea about other states.

I believe you can depreciate CAPEX costs, as well.

The lack of nationalized mental health care in the US is really showing it’s effects…

If this was economically feasible people would do it. It’s waaaay easier formPower plants to add a bazillion watts of capacity in normal places. What you’re describing does exist and has been done on remote areas, but those areas lack demand to do this often. With the exception of extreme weather events like heat waves there is plenty of capacity. And what you’re describing would not be economically feasible if you’re just trying to cover the exceptions.

Don’t fall for the propaganda. There is plenty of power, we are not running out. As more grid scale batteries come online and we change from a generate the exact amount we can use model this problem will be alleviated in the near future.

Let’s just pull some numbers and ‘facts’ out of our ass, or worse Facebook. Then we can jump to any conclusion we want.

Real example: Our 4MW electricity supply was nowhere near 7 figures. That’s likely enough for 3+ dozen stalls with load management.

Let’s add more pollution because I have a great idea.