Allow me to debunk a nonsensical scare story in the @spectator yesterday, claiming electric cars are impossible because they would lead to a complete replacement of the electricity grid.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-s-green-industrial-revolution-is-doomed-to-fail

We have another winner. Another retired professor (this time a physicist) who thinks he understands the green industrial revolution better than these young kids that come up with crazy ideas that are more inventive than insulation and driving less.

Prof Kelly laments that Boris Johnsons 'green industrial revolution' is doomed to fail.

Specifically:
'Nowhere is the flaw in the government's plan more clearly exposed than in the announcement that sales of new petrol, diesel and hybrid cars will be banned by 2030.'

First, we would have to place 'thousands of chargers a day'. 'Is this really realistic?' Kelly asks rhetorically.

I'm always flabbergasted by people that think building chargers is somehow more difficult than building cars. Just imagine how big, heavy, and complex a car is compared to a charger!

Believe me, if we can manage the cars,
we can manage the chargers.

Then comes the 'coup the grâce':

'every time an electric car is charged, it requires more than double the amount of electricity an average home uses now. ... We would need to completely upgrade electric wiring in our homes, streets, substations, and transmission lines.'

Really?

The proof? 'Most cars charge at 7kW for a typical 8 hours.'

Uhm: 7kW*8hours = 56kWh. Enough to drive 200 miles.
BUT on an average day a car only drives 20-30 miles!

So it only needs to charge at 1 kW or charge for 1 hour.
This simple fact invalidates the whole column.

More importantly, scientists who actually study electric vehicles know they will use smart charging:
https://www.elaad.nl/research/smart-charging/.

That way they avoid causing peaks on the grid and actually help to use solar and wind more optimally.
This is apparently news to Kelly.

He goes on to lament the plans were made by 'climate scientists who have little practical understanding of their proposals'.

I have news for Kelly: there's usually people like me involved who have actually been studying the practicality of those proposals for over ten years.

Implementing the green revolution is certainly not trivial. But it would be a bit easier if elderly gentlemen like Kelly, who really have no idea what they are talking about, would leave the discussion to actual experts who actually study this for a living.

/end rant

Question to followers: who should I tag in debunks like this? I was thinking of @bobbyllew but could imagine he's already swamped. (Sir ?) Anyone else?

(Already tagged a couple of people btw. but forgot my friends @M_Steinbuch and @carlovdweijer.)

As @ChrisA25708864 points out in the reactions, one of the parties agreeing with me on all this is @nationalgriduk.
https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/5-myths-about-electric-vehicles-busted

But what do they know about the grid, right? They are only the grid operator. Not a retired physics professor working for @thegwpfcom.