Economic Development - Expansions and Relocations

[CLT Development]

4 hours ago, DCMetroRaleigh said:

This is true. On Twitter, a lot people are rooting for electric cars to fail for political readies.

People are warning that Electic vehicles are not the answer. The answer is less cars, more transit.

[DMann]

As much as I am a proponent of EV's, better transit is really more desirable.

[CLT2014]

Transit is 100% more desirable and serves a wider range of citizens to provide mobility for all. EV adoption is over-indexing towards affluent suburban residents, which makes sense as the product and the upfront infrastructure to support it is expensive. Right now 80% of EV owners are estimated to live in single-family detached homes compared to 63% of the general population. It is especially skewed for Tesla owners where 88% own. 57% make over $100k compared to 34% of the general population. 87% are estimated to be white compared to 60% of the US population. 75% of EV buyers are men compared to 60% of car buyers in general. 

I personally think it is still a long road for EV adoption to move beyond the educated, white, liberal man living in a detached single family home with their own charger. 

Millions of people in this country don't live in a suburban single family. The infrastructure cost at apartments and multi-family like the building below is massive. The task at hand is how to equip a naturally affordable apartment complex like the one below off Central Ave that has sub-$1,000 a month units that low income households can afford with chargers without the landlords increasing rent to recoup the installation costs. I don't think landlords will share in the investment without either 100% covered by the government or at least the ability to increase rent on tenants. All of the government investment into EVs is at the expense of more money for transit too. 

I think EV infrastructure in apartments like the below one will have to roll out like internet service providers, where private companies take the risk or installing and then charge residents to recoup their investment. 

Edited November 13, 2023 by CLT2014

[kermit]

And to join the pile on, it also appears that electric vehicles generate significantly more particulate emissions than ICE vehicles. This is the stuff (tire dust, break dust, road dust) which generates the nastiest public heath impacts.

 

[Windsurfer]

1 hour ago, kermit said:

And to join the pile on, it also appears that electric vehicles generate significantly more particulate emissions than ICE vehicles. This is the stuff (tire dust, break dust, road dust) which generates the nastiest public heath impacts.

 

I'd like to read the entire article.  I don't believe it.  Discarding the engine types...diesel, gas, electric, etc. they all burn rubber.

[davidclt]

2 hours ago, kermit said:

And to join the pile on, it also appears that electric vehicles generate significantly more particulate emissions than ICE vehicles. This is the stuff (tire dust, break dust, road dust) which generates the nastiest public heath impacts.

 

 

Here's a link to the paper: Comparison of total PM emissions emitted from electric and internal combustion engine vehicles: An experimental analysis - ScienceDirect

Hyundai Kona in three power trains.

Gasoline/Diesel/Electric

Table 1. Specifications of the gasoline ICEV, diesel ICEV, and EV used in this study.

Model	Type	Powertrain	Displacement (cm3)	M/Y	Odometer (km)	Catalyst	Weight (kg)
KONA 1.6T	Gasoline ICEV	T/C GDI engine	1591	2018	92,998	TWC	1370
KONA 1.6D	Diesel ICEV	T/C DI engine	1582	2019	58,091	DPF + LNT	1395
KONA EV	EV	Electric motor	–	2020	25,000	–	1665

 

T/C: turbo-charged, GDI: gasoline direct injection, DPF: diesel particulate filter, LNT: lean NOx trap.

Net/Net: because EVs are heavier, generally speaking brakes, tires and roadway wear measurable more quickly. It is clear as EVs continue to improve, brakes (which generally wear less in more fully-realized EVs because of regenerative braking) and tires will improve with EV specific tires with lower rolling-resistance and compounds technology to further reduce airborne emissions.

I also maintain that large trucks while necessary to keep things moving, emit far more emissions and do more damage to the roads than cars.

Edited November 13, 2023 by davidclt

[kermit]

6 minutes ago, Windsurfer said:

I'd like to read the entire article.  I don't believe it.  Discarding the engine types...diesel, gas, electric, etc. they all burn rubber.

I believe this is an open access link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896972204058X?via%3Dihub

TLDR: higher power to weight ratios of electrics (and greater weight of most, many of these things are beasts) generate more tire and break dust.

[CLTdev18]

Unless I read the conclusion to that study incorrectly, the study actually states that EVs have lower PM EF.

Quote

We comprehensively evaluated the exhaust and non-exhaust emissions of a gasoline ICEV, diesel ICEV, and EV, all sharing the same vehicle body. The EFs of the exhaust PM of the three vehicles were calculated as primary and secondary PM. We individually analyzed the characteristics of non-exhaust emissions from brake wear, tire wear, road wear, and resuspended road dust.

The EFs for the total PM emissions of ICEVs and EV were highly dependent on the inclusion of secondary exhaust particulate matter (PM) from ICEVs, the brake pad type, and the regenerative braking intensity of the EV. When only primary exhaust PM emissions were considered in vehicles equipped with non-asbestos organic (NAO) brake pads, the total PM₁₀ EF of the EV was 10 % higher than those of the ICEVs. However, in vehicles equipped with low-metallic (LM) brake pads, PM emissions from brake wear significantly increased but regenerative braking effectively reduced the brake wear PM, such that the total PM EF of the EV was comparable or lower than those of the ICEVs. When secondary PM emissions were included, the EF was always significantly lower for the EV than ICEVs.

Our study showed that the total PM EF of the EV was significantly lower than that of the gasoline ICEV and diesel ICEV, when secondary exhaust PM was included in the determination. Therefore, the replacement of ICEVs by EVs can improve air quality and reduce the adverse impact of PM on human health. However, it should be noted that it is exceedingly difficult to model secondary PM emissions (Hoogerbrugge et al., 2010). Not only do many studies have difficulty determining the fractional contribution vehicles make to secondary PM, but it is also problematic to differentiate between primary and secondary PM (Bahreini et al., 2012). In addition, as there is no standardized laboratory method to estimate the EFs of secondary PM emissions, secondary PM is currently not considered in emission inventories. Therefore, more research is needed to assess what portion of precursor gases effectively become PM and their impact on local urban air quality. If only primary exhaust PM emissions are considered, they may be higher in EVs than ICEVs, in which cases EVs will contribute have little effect on air quality in urban areas unless the regenerative braking intensity is near maximum. Thus, it can be confidently concluded that EVs are not zero emission vehicles. Additional experimental analyses are needed to accurately estimate the total PM EF emitted by EVs and ICEVs.

 

[kermit]

^ my bad. It appears I was mislead by a tweet. Sorry, I thought everything you see on the internet was true....

To be fair, the conclusion does suggest that EVs do little to reduce particulate emissions (looks to be about the same)

Edited November 13, 2023 by kermit

[Windsurfer]

23 minutes ago, CLTdev18 said:

Unless I read the conclusion to that study incorrectly, the study actually states that EVs have lower PM EF.

 

Thanks for the links.  As a non-academic, I admit I'm having to struggle reading this study.  As an ex auto parts guy I feel like I can say a couple of things. 1)  The authors keep referring to organic and in organic brake pads. You really cannot buy organic pads anymore because of the asbestos (asbestos, itself, is inorganic; however, organic material was used to help bond the asbestos)

The issue of "PM" is interesting on a couple of fronts.  One is, diesel emits huge amounts of particulate matter, as opposed to petroleum "ICE". (Love these acronyms). You can't just casually lump them together, which the authors do.  Two, the point of "EVs" is that they end CO2.  Is CO2 a "PM" issue?  No, CO2 isn't particulate matter.

As a non-academic, and from 30,000 feet, this article seems like yet another attempt to discredit EVs. 

It's happy hour in London right now. I'm not completely coherent.  Regards.

 

[Vitamin_N]

On 11/13/2023 at 1:13 PM, Windsurfer said:

Two, the point of "EVs" is that they end CO2. 

They don't though. They are most likely to be powered by coal and natural gas. "But what about wind and solar," one might ask... They're still a small proportion of total electric generation and they are not capable of providing baseload generation so in the absence of a quantum leap in battery technology and cost they will remain a sideshow. Moreover when talking about EVs you also need to take into account the tremendous amount of mining (and therefore energy for that mining) that would be needed to supply the additional lithium, copper, and other metals. It is not currently feasible to have electric-powered mining equipment.

[CLT2014]

Chop the trees down! Get ready for Gaston County to be covered in lithium mines. Has to come from somewhere and a lot of it will be in our backyard. I'm sad so much forested space will be lost, but we have some of the richest deposits in our area and it is inevitable they will heavily mine this region. 

Edited November 15, 2023 by CLT2014

[Windsurfer]

40 minutes ago, Vitamin_N said:

They don't though. They are most likely to be powered by coal and natural gas. "But what about wind and solar," one might ask... They're still a small proportion of total electric generation and they are not capable of providing baseload generation so in the absence of a quantum leap in battery technology and cost they will remain a sideshow. Moreover when talking about EVs you also need to take into account the tremendous amount of mining (and therefore energy for that mining) that would be needed to supply the additional lithium, copper, and other metals. It is not currently feasible to have electric-powered mining equipment.

Did you forget nuclear?  After all, the bulk of our electricity in this area is from Maguire.  Biden is pro-nuclear and it looks like more generating plants will be approved.

Did you forget all the mining for oil.? And, yes drilling is a form of mining and, I might add detrimental to global warming when they off gas the holes and process the crude.

I predict that the pit in this area will not be as developed as quickly as the picture below shows. Since this local mine was approved, there have been huge discoveries in Oregon and Chile. Both in the desert. Those will be a lot cheaper to develop. I'm actually against such large open pits. The good news is, batteries will soon come along that won't even use lithium. There will be amazing new batteries developed. 

This argument of not enough "baseload generation" is getting old. I see it often on all the forums. Must be a talking point.  And, this argument about batteries technology being backward gets old too. Toyota is investing millions of dollars in their new plant locally.  I'm guessing they see a future in them.

The advantages of EVs over ICEs is huge, especially for city driving. No antifreeze. Minimal lubricant. No additives. VERY few parts that break. (I should know having been in the parts business for 60 of my 65 years.). That is HUGE. You can't imagine the piles of old auto parts that get dumped, and how many are hazardous.

[nicholas]

3 hours ago, Windsurfer said:

The advantages of EVs over ICEs is huge, especially for city driving. No antifreeze. Minimal lubricant. No additives. VERY few parts that break. (I should know having been in the parts business for 60 of my 65 years.). That is HUGE. You can't imagine the piles of old auto parts that get dumped, and how many are hazardous.

Imo (as a car enthusiast/gearhead)...

Given the type of infrastructure investment over much of the past century (especially in America), cars are virtually a necessity for most people

SO

cars are extremely visible by everyone everyday

BUT

a substantial majority of people don't really enjoy driving

AND (most critically)

there is growing concern about the impact of ICEs on the environment.

---

All of that makes it incredibly easy to demonize cars, particularly in the wake of growing environmental concerns.  They're basically in your face all day every day.  So EVs are pushed as something of a remedy for each of those points.  We can all post factoids and studies showing this and that about how bad ICEs supposedly are, how good EVs supposedly are, etc, but at the end of the day I would like to think that most of us on this forum can agree that reducing car dependency should be a much higher priority than just switching to a different kind of car.  Obviously there will always be things that we need cars and trucks for, but from my observation a decent number of trips can be easily handled by ebikes and motorcycles, which bridge the gap by allowing for fairly quick travel around/across town while using minimal to no fuel, contributing a negligible amount towards road wear, and taking up substantially less parking space than cars.

I am not anti EV, and even as a car enthusiast there are only a handful of ICE cars currently in production that I would be interested enough in to buy new (due to too much needless tech and too much of a focus towards performance numbers on paper), but I am of the opinion that EVs are being pushed to save the auto industry more than the environment.  There's minimal public backlash towards things that aren't as readily visible...the tens of thousands of private jets (most of which are based in America), each burning hundreds of gallons of fuel every hour to ferry mostly celebrities and executives and politicians between cities already served by existing airlines.  The 50,000+ cargo ships each burning upwards of 60,000 thousands of gallons of fuel every singly day, carting various goods across the globe because so many countries have outsourced their manufacturing to counties that have minimal environmental protection efforts/human rights (does anyone care that their iPhone was likely produced with near-slave labor?).  Stuff like that.  Idk I guess my mind is just wandering like usual, but I do wonder about the "out of sight out of mind" secondary effects that are less visible like mineral mining, battery recycling, etc.  I can't imagine a Gaston County lithium mine being popular with residents of the Charlotte region who might have the will and political connections to kill a venture like that, but I have a hard time believing there would be anywhere near as much impactful resistance down in Chile (which while I'm not an expert on Chile it likely doesn't have nearly as stringent environmental/worker protections as the US, and is also MUCH farther away from numerous new and coming battery plants here in the US which necessitates additional resources to transport everything to the states).

And yeah, everything I own/have owned has been powered by an ICE.  My car is from 2011, my motorcycle is from 2009, and my project motorcycles are from the mid-1970s.  But the way I look at it, the main initial environmental impact from each of those vehicles happened over a decade ago.  Granted I have to replace various fluids and components here and there (on my car I'm about to change the oil/filter and replace the brake pads/fluid and oxygen sensors, and on my 09 motorcycle I am replacing the fork oil/seals) and perhaps I'm completely wrong, but by and large it seems like, by fixing a few minor things here and there as needed, the amount of waste and environmental impact I am responsible for is pretty minor compared to what it would be if I was buying brand new cars and motorcycles every few years (regardless of whether they were ICE or EV).

Edited November 15, 2023 by nicholas

[Windsurfer]

13 hours ago, nicholas said:

Imo (as a car enthusiast/gearhead)...

Given the type of infrastructure investment over much of the past century (especially in America), cars are virtually a necessity for most people

SO

cars are extremely visible by everyone everyday

BUT

a substantial majority of people don't really enjoy driving

AND (most critically)

there is growing concern about the impact of ICEs on the environment.

---

All of that makes it incredibly easy to demonize cars, particularly in the wake of growing environmental concerns.  They're basically in your face all day every day.  So EVs are pushed as something of a remedy for each of those points.  We can all post factoids and studies showing this and that about how bad ICEs supposedly are, how good EVs supposedly are, etc, but at the end of the day I would like to think that most of us on this forum can agree that reducing car dependency should be a much higher priority than just switching to a different kind of car.  Obviously there will always be things that we need cars and trucks for, but from my observation a decent number of trips can be easily handled by ebikes and motorcycles, which bridge the gap by allowing for fairly quick travel around/across town while using minimal to no fuel, contributing a negligible amount towards road wear, and taking up substantially less parking space than cars.

I am not anti EV, and even as a car enthusiast there are only a handful of ICE cars currently in production that I would be interested enough in to buy new (due to too much needless tech and too much of a focus towards performance numbers on paper), but I am of the opinion that EVs are being pushed to save the auto industry more than the environment.  There's minimal public backlash towards things that aren't as readily visible...the tens of thousands of private jets (most of which are based in America), each burning hundreds of gallons of fuel every hour to ferry mostly celebrities and executives and politicians between cities already served by existing airlines.  The 50,000+ cargo ships each burning upwards of 60,000 thousands of gallons of fuel every singly day, carting various goods across the globe because so many countries have outsourced their manufacturing to counties that have minimal environmental protection efforts/human rights (does anyone care that their iPhone was likely produced with near-slave labor?).  Stuff like that.  Idk I guess my mind is just wandering like usual, but I do wonder about the "out of sight out of mind" secondary effects that are less visible like mineral mining, battery recycling, etc.  I can't imagine a Gaston County lithium mine being popular with residents of the Charlotte region who might have the will and political connections to kill a venture like that, but I have a hard time believing there would be anywhere near as much impactful resistance down in Chile (which while I'm not an expert on Chile it likely doesn't have nearly as stringent environmental/worker protections as the US, and is also MUCH farther away from numerous new and coming battery plants here in the US which necessitates additional resources to transport everything to the states).

And yeah, everything I own/have owned has been powered by an ICE.  My car is from 2011, my motorcycle is from 2009, and my project motorcycles are from the mid-1970s.  But the way I look at it, the main initial environmental impact from each of those vehicles happened over a decade ago.  Granted I have to replace various fluids and components here and there (on my car I'm about to change the oil/filter and replace the brake pads/fluid and oxygen sensors, and on my 09 motorcycle I am replacing the fork oil/seals) and perhaps I'm completely wrong, but by and large it seems like, by fixing a few minor things here and there as needed, the amount of waste and environmental impact I am responsible for is pretty minor compared to what it would be if I was buying brand new cars and motorcycles every few years (regardless of whether they were ICE or EV).

Thanks for the nice long reply. I have lots to say about this topic, but I fear it's all off topic from the header....unless you want to lump it all into battery factories

[Vitamin_N]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:02 AM, Windsurfer said:

Did you forget nuclear?  After all, the bulk of our electricity in this area is from Maguire.  Biden is pro-nuclear and it looks like more generating plants will be approved.

I  am well aware of nuclear and am in fact invested in a Duke Energy uranium supplier but it's a smaller source of electrical power nationwide. Gas is something like 40%, coal 20-25%, and nuclear 10%.

Quote

This argument of not enough "baseload generation" is getting old. I see it often on all the forums. Must be a talking point. 

If it's that old then surely you have a rebuttal to it? I've yet to see one. "Must be a talking point" is snark. Do better. 

[KJHburg]

this thread needs to be renamed or the current EV topic needs to be moved elsewhere and I thought their was an EV thread already. 

to put in photos this thread is ......................

[rancenc]

The NC Department of Commerce has released the recent economic  low to high rankings of the state's 100 counties in reference to economic viability.

https://www.thecentersquare.com/north_carolina/article_95b82d3a-907e-11ee-9b07-d7a9397c4ff3.html

[videtur quam contuor]

Hyde County and Tyrell County, population ~4500 and  3200 respectively, and declining. At what point does each cease to be a viable county? Counties were established with (general) sense that county seat was accessible from nearly all parts of the county in one day when horse or boat was the mode. With modern transportation this is no longer a standard. Tyrell and Hyde public schools have ~ 900 students combined, all grades. There is no way this decline trend will reverse in the future. Economic viability for them starts with consolidation with each other or another bordering county.

Graham County in the far west has similar though not as advanced numbers. Graham has features that could attract more residents but with federal and tribal land making >80% of county this is unlikely.

 All economically successful counties are alike; each economically unviable county is  troubled in its own way.

Tolstoy (sort of)

[kermit]

^ Western Counties have had quite the renaissance over the past 5 years. It was not too long ago that counties like Caldwell, McDowell and Madison were really struggling. While Rutherford is still in the lowest tier, it also seems much better for the most part. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by kermit

[KJHburg]

This seems to be a newly expanded  office and HQ for Charlotte locating at Vantage Southend and the buildings are now 100% leased!

From the Biz Journal:

""Global logistics company DP World is expanding its stateside operations with a move into Vantage South End.

The Dubai company signed a 10-year lease for 30,000 square feet in the office development's West Tower at 1415 Vantage Park Drive. DP World will occupy the entire sixth floor when it moves in next March, bringing Vantage South End to 100% occupancy.

Vantage South End is a $300 million development by The Spectrum Cos. It consists of two 11-story towers totaling 635,000 square feet of office and retail space.  

DP World moved its Americas operations to Charlotte nearly 20 years ago and is currently in 4,300 square feet at 5605 Carnegie Blvd. in SouthPark. The current office holds about 25 employees. The new space will have room for more than 100 people, with about 85 there on a daily basis.

The Spectrum Cos.' Virginia Luther and Dillard Williams represented Vantage in the lease transaction.

Other West Tower tenants include LendingTree Inc. (NASDAQ: TREE), Northmarq Capital, Grant Thornton and Allspring Global Investments. East Tower tenants at 1120 S. Tryon St. include CBRE, The Hartford, Alston & Bird, Brightspeed and Armstrong Transport Group.

Morten Johansen, chief operating officer at DP World, said growing into a much larger footprint sets the company up for a successful future. Johansen said they considered locations in SouthPark and uptown before ultimately settling on South End. Initially, the company signed a lease for 15,000 square feet and later amended the contract to include the entire floor.""

DP World to lease remaining office space at Vantage South End - Charlotte Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

[RANYC]

9 hours ago, KJHburg said:

This seems to be a newly expanded  office and HQ for Charlotte locating at Vantage Southend and the buildings are now 100% leased!

From the Biz Journal:

""Global logistics company DP World is expanding its stateside operations with a move into Vantage South End.

The Dubai company signed a 10-year lease for 30,000 square feet in the office development's West Tower at 1415 Vantage Park Drive. DP World will occupy the entire sixth floor when it moves in next March, bringing Vantage South End to 100% occupancy.

Vantage South End is a $300 million development by The Spectrum Cos. It consists of two 11-story towers totaling 635,000 square feet of office and retail space.  

DP World moved its Americas operations to Charlotte nearly 20 years ago and is currently in 4,300 square feet at 5605 Carnegie Blvd. in SouthPark. The current office holds about 25 employees. The new space will have room for more than 100 people, with about 85 there on a daily basis.

The Spectrum Cos.' Virginia Luther and Dillard Williams represented Vantage in the lease transaction.

Other West Tower tenants include LendingTree Inc. (NASDAQ: TREE), Northmarq Capital, Grant Thornton and Allspring Global Investments. East Tower tenants at 1120 S. Tryon St. include CBRE, The Hartford, Alston & Bird, Brightspeed and Armstrong Transport Group.

Morten Johansen, chief operating officer at DP World, said growing into a much larger footprint sets the company up for a successful future. Johansen said they considered locations in SouthPark and uptown before ultimately settling on South End. Initially, the company signed a lease for 15,000 square feet and later amended the contract to include the entire floor.""

DP World to lease remaining office space at Vantage South End - Charlotte Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

Company rep had this to say about the Firm's search for space: "Uptown had abundant space but didn’t really fit what we’re trying to move toward in terms of technology and what we're trying to create with what we do."

[Windsurfer]

18 hours ago, RANYC said:

Company rep had this to say about the Firm's search for space: "Uptown had abundant space but didn’t really fit what we’re trying to move toward in terms of technology and what we're trying to create with what we do."

Wonder what the vision is that's different?  

[KJHburg]

Eli Lilly plant in Concord started in June 2022 announced in Jan 2022 is almost complete.  

Eli Lilly Parenteral Products Manufacturing Facility, North Carolina (pharmaceutical-technology.com)

I wish all our big developments would move this fast.  

 

[KJHburg]

I heard Mr Chung say this earlier in the year in Concord about economic development prospects in the state manufacturing and  distribution vs office related.   From the Triangle Biz Journal

""As 2023 draws to a close, there’s a noticeable gap when it comes to companies promising to bring jobs to North Carolina — the lack of big headquarters projects.

Chris Chung, CEO of the Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina, said office projects used to account for 30 percent of the projects in his team’s pipeline of companies considering the state for relocations and expansions. But those wins — projects like Advance Auto Parts (NYSE: AAP) bringing its headquarters to Raleigh in 2018 and PolicyGenius launching a Durham hub in 2019 — were before the pandemic and the rise of remote work.

“We’re all waiting to see if and when and to what degree things like office-based employee projects return,” Chung said. “We still haven’t seen any meaningful bump in that activity. It’s been consistently 5 percent or less.”

But he’s optimistic and says interest hasn’t completely vanished. His team saw a few new office projects join the pipeline in November, including one headquarters facility eyeing the state. And this month, luxury watch company Audemars Piguet announced plans to bring 105 jobs to Raleigh Iron Works in a 60,000-square-foot space.

Of the 260 active projects that Chung's team had at the start of the month, three fourths were recruitment deals – companies not currently operating in North Carolina. The remainder are existing employers considering expansions.

If North Carolina were to win all projects in the pipeline, it would mean 75,000 new jobs and $62 billion in new investments.

Last month brought in 60 percent more new projects than November 2022. EDPNC considers it a new project when the agency is contacted by a company beginning their decision-making process. 

Deals that include foreign direct investment — companies coming from overseas — are increasing. Right now, they make up 45 percent of the pipeline, with China, Germany and Japan as the top three markets for foreign opportunities.""

While office projects stay away, NC sees manufacturing opportunities grow - Triangle Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

what does this mean for Charlotte which usually attracts headquarters type or major office relocations?  It means don't depend on them for demand maybe a few small ones here and there but we need get more industrial sites in this area which most of our surrounding counties have and the Charlotte Regional Biz Alliance needs to find some megasites in this region.    I hear nothing about the Centene office nor can I find any marketing out there on it?  Has anyone heard anything about it lately or people looking at it?  @CLT Development @atlrvr