One step closer to zero emission power equipment

[Egon]

This is what gets me when you hear the "If California was a country it's economy would be bigger than <some country>" argument, or you hear how much Californians care about the environment. Seems like if California was it's own country it wouldn't even be able to support itself since they import 25% of their electricity and most of their water. Lucky for them they have generous neighbors who can spare both.

That “water” is well locked up by leases and stipulated on what can be done with it. Some places rain barrels for roof runoff are not allowed. Wells are closely regulated and will require permits. There is nothing generous or spare about it.

 

[CH4Ohio]

No matter what kind of battery-powered devices and tools are used downstream, they still have to be charged on the electrical grid. A grid which is already failing miserably in some areas, especially out West. All these electric cars and tools are running on a combination of COAL, Nuclear, Natural Gas, Hydro, plus about 1.5% "Renewables" (Wind and Solar combined). They're only electric AFTER we burn fossil fuels, split atoms, or harness falling water.

The authors of these mandates seem to think that the power for these devices magically pours out of the wall and eliminates fossil fuels. Mining the materials and building the batteries and transmitting the power is much less efficient than just using a gallon of diesel or gasoline where and when it's needed.

This is an ideology lacking in common sense and aimed at forcing us to use technology and infrastructure that doesn't even exist.

 

[Jchonline]

This isn't about zero emissions BTW, it's about FOLLOW DA MONEY. Who gains? Those that get taxes from the electric power (usually higher than petro) and those who supply electric.

A single solar panel and a Renology charge controller can change 6VDC, 12VDC and 24VDC Li batteries. This way, the setup will fully pay for itself in 1-year based on the CA prices for electrical grid power. All the following years would be FREE.

The Renology is the only cost effective 30A controller with AGM, basic car battery, RV/Marine battery, Li battery charging on the market. It also comes with USB ports to run and charge those devices too.

https://www.amazon.com/Renogy-Adventurer-30A-Negative-Ground-Controller/dp/B07BBKTTLG

Careful…there are only certain solar panels that can charge at 24V. Many need to be wired in Series to provide 24V output. Also with respect to batteries, if exposed to hot or cold environments you can’t use car, marine, or Li. You have to stick with AGM or you will Shorten the life of your battery considerably. Li specifically must be in a heated enclosure in temps below 40.

You also need the Sun to be out to provide charging, this is an issue in some areas and in most areas at certain times of the year.

 

[Jchonline]

No matter what kind of battery-powered devices and tools are used downstream, they still have to be charged on the electrical grid. A grid which is already failing miserably in some areas, especially out West. All these electric cars and tools are running on a combination of COAL, Nuclear, Natural Gas, Hydro, plus about 1.5% "Renewables" (Wind and Solar combined). They're only electric AFTER we burn fossil fuels, split atoms, or harness falling water.

The authors of these mandates seem to think that the power for these devices magically pours out of the wall and eliminates fossil fuels. Mining the materials and building the batteries and transmitting the power is much less efficient than just using a gallon of diesel or gasoline where and when it's needed.

This is an ideology lacking in common sense and aimed at forcing us to use technology and infrastructure that doesn't even exist.

Absolutely. We need to build a new grid with solar and wind backed up by nuclear.

 

[Snobdds]

It’s not just battery life. Blade/chain/tip speed, whatever you want to call it is sorely lacking.
The speed of my electric saw compared to a high revving 2 stroke? Not comparable.

You're best post and confirmation you understand it.

Battery will never have the chain speed to efficiently cut wood. Managing an air pump with some fuel is far superior to managing elections...

 

[Snobdds]

Nah...EGO Chainsaws with a 5.0A/h battery go for quite a while. I've dropped some smaller (6" (or so) trunks. Mostly used for trimming branches though. Recharge, on the fast charger, takes about 30 minutes
The 5.0A/h battery provides both pretty good "life" and good balance of the saw.
Now, I wouldn't consider this a good saw if you need to fell a number of trees or bucking a number of fallen trees (unless you have 3-4 batteries on hand), but for residential/farmette use, a battery chainsaw can be a good investment.
Now, I'm not a greenie or tree hugger...I bought this saw for ease of use and no worries about mixing gas and 2 stroke oil

I guess I'm not a residential user. I have cabin with 60 acres of forest. I would need 20 batteries to get through one day of work. That's nonsense...

As it is, I use one saw for felling, one saw for limbing, one saw for bucking up the big end of the log. A very fast and quick revving saw for felling, a small and light top handle saw for limbing, and a big powerful saw for bucking.

 

[CH4Ohio]

Absolutely. We need to build a new grid with solar and wind backed up by nuclear.

Wind and solar are not green and will never be able to supply our needs. It's a farce. Nuclear is the only zero-emissions fuel of the future and will need to be primary, not backup.

Follow the cradle-to-grave of wind turbines. From mining rare-Earth elements in China to final construction and then tear-down decommissioning in 20 years. There's nothing green about it.

I'm not sure how this thread has managed to NOT get political . . .

 

[Jchonline]

Wind and solar are not green and will never be able to supply our needs. It's a farce. Nuclear is the only zero-emissions fuel of the future and will need to be primary, not backup.

Follow the cradle-to-grave of wind turbines. From mining rare-Earth elements in China to final construction and then tear-down decommissioning in 20 years. There's nothing green about it.

I'm not sure how this thread has managed to NOT get political . . .

Nothing is completely green. Nuclear plants take tons of Carbon in manufacturing to produce. Nuclear isnt the only fuel of the future, it is just the best one we have available right now. Who knows what we will come up with in the next 50 years.

 

[RoyJackson]

I guess I'm not a residential user. I have cabin with 60 acres of forest. I would need 20 batteries to get through one day of work. That's nonsense...

As it is, I use one saw for felling, one saw for limbing, one saw for bucking up the big end of the log. A very fast and quick revving saw for felling, a small and light top handle saw for limbing, and a big powerful saw for bucking.

Yep your work isn't a good candidate for a battery chainsaw, just as I'd written in my post

 

[Jchonline]

You're best post and confirmation you understand it.

Battery will never have the chain speed to efficiently cut wood. Managing an air pump with some fuel is far superior to managing elections...

Actually this really depends on the operating environment. Try using a 35cc saw at 9000 ft and you will understand. The battery saw absolutely crushes it for power. I have 3 different battery saws, and 3 ICE saws. For 14 inch bar and under cutting (limbing, light tree felling) battery wins for me. Milwaukee and Husquvarna. The stihl I have is a 12 inch with a thinner kerf…its super light but still a bit weak for felling. Very nice for light limb work. So all cutting I do on smaller material is now battery work. I have 45 acres of pines, firs, aspen, cedar. All soft wood, so that also might impact my liking of the current battery offerings.