Hacker News
points by chadash 1 day ago | 0 comments
Most people (like me) don't have generators. But when I hear "oh, BTW this car can be a used as a generator for 48-72 hours in a power outage", that's a nice little selling point that might put me over the edge if i'm otherwise considering the car. No, this doesn't solve for Hurricane Katrina. But it does solve for a nor'easter.
[–] petcat 1 day ago
My car is basically one big gas-powered generator that has the benefit of also not requiring a functional power station to refill itself.

It has other downsides, obviously. But the notion of "emergency power for your house" isn't really anything special.

[–] aftbit 1 day ago
It probably does though, unless you have stockpiled gas. If the power is down to the gas station, the pumps don't work.

My experience with power outages (after big summer storms, not a hurricane thank goodness) has been that my neighborhood is impacted, but that places nearby have power. They tend to restore commercial first, so the supercharger near me is up and running before my house.

[–] jjav 1 day ago
> If the power is down to the gas station, the pumps don't work.

In places where long power outages are common (hurricane areas), many gas stations have their own generators (they also have a convenient source of fuel to run them!)

[–] sumeno 1 day ago
If the power is down to the charging station the chargers don't work, this is just as likely as the power being down at the gas station
[–] labcomputer 1 day ago
Let me know when you figure out how to refill your gas car from solar panels.
[–] solyin 1 day ago
I know you're being snarky, but the chemical process for that exists! It's called the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. You take air, CO2 specifically, and then run the process, which needs electricity, possibly from solar panels, and get diesel/gasoline/jet fuel out the other end! Isn't science amazing?

There are practical issues with it, but it's possible. The question is EROI or Energy Return on Investment. Do you get more energy from it than it took to make it, which unfortunately is not there yet. Shrinking it down to fit into your backyard is an exercise left for the reader.

[–] marcta 1 day ago
Hyperspace Pirate tried this at home, and it's horribly inefficient: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRKbjT8AoJw
[–] localhost 1 day ago
it is more than possible - this is exactly what casey handmer and his startup terraform industries is doing in a pilot plant in the desert: https://blog.terraformindustries.com/2026/10/21/terraform-20...
[–] SJC_Hacker 1 day ago
Fischer-Tropsch uses CO, not CO2. You also need hydrogen. The input is not air but other hydrocarbons. Coal being the most common.
[–] sumeno 1 day ago
If you've got solar panels sufficent to charge a cybertruck then you don't need the cybertruck to power your home. Regular battery systems will work
[–] petcat 1 day ago
Charging an EV from regular household solar panels would take days....

And that's assuming they are sunny days.

[–] lanstin 1 day ago
I think your math is off some how. I have a Model 3 and two Leafs and we charge them from our 39 400 Watt panels without trouble. They are always ready to go fully charged unless one of the boys has been doing more than normal of driving to the beach with a girlfriend and then borrowing the Model 3 for a concert, or whatever fun involves using all the stored energy at the same time (e.g. not commutes to school or work).
[–] xedrac 17 hours ago
My 12 kw solar system charges my 32kwh battery in a few hours on sunny days. But to be fair, your system is even larger, and both of our solar systems are larger than average for home solar. A 5 kw system would indeed take days to charge a typical ev battery from zero to full.
[–] lostlogin 1 day ago
It takes about a 6-8 hours to charge my Leaf on a small solar install.

But yes, it needs to be sunny if that’s going to be pure solar.

[–] ryanbrunner 1 day ago
I realize the person you're replying to wasn't specific and said just "EV" but a leaf and a cybertruck are pretty much the polar ends of a spectrum.
[–] imtringued 21 hours ago
There are many hours in a day and EVs are pretty efficient. You might struggle if your goal is to drive 200km per day but if all you want is to drive to work or go shopping, you'll be fine.
[–] sveme 1 day ago
What? My BIL’s installation is small, roughly 8kWp, on sunny days he easily gets 40-50kWh, if not more.
[–] rightnutwingjob 1 day ago
The Cybertruck has a 123kW battery, so charging it would take days, assuming they are sunny days.
[–] its_ethan 1 day ago
because solar panels only exist on houses?
[–] rightnutwingjob 1 day ago
Because EVs are only powered by solar?
[–] rightnutwingjob 1 day ago
Let me know when you invent solar panels that aren’t vulnerable to damaging winds.
[–] pmontra 1 day ago
Where I live solar panels have been smashed by hail ice balls, 3 inches diameter.
[–] scarecrowbob 1 day ago
Probably when they invent a genset that can sustain its surrounding structure being immolated in a wildfire?

I'm 100% off grid on solar in the middle of nowhere. My panels could burn up, get hit by hail, get searched by law enforcement, flooded out, eaten by mice, stolen by miscreants, abducted by aliens or buried in snow. And of course in the event of a volcano they are probably not gonna function well.

So they are of course totally unworkable in events when the power grid is down.

But I like using them and they've been reliable so far...

[–] LordDragonfang 1 day ago
> unless you have stockpiled gas

And are regularly rotating that stockpile, because gasoline has a shelf life measured in months

edit: Apparently this leans more technically-true factoid than fact, thank you replies

[–] AngryData 1 day ago
Unless you are trying to race your car at the drag strip with charged air and hit your best times, that isn't true at all and I don't know why people keep saying it. You think everybody empties their lawn mowers, snow blowers, snowmobiles, generators, etc. every year of gas or before trying to start it up again the next year? No way.

Simpler gas equipment like mowers and generators don't have enough compression to really care about anything but ancient gas, and if you run any vehicle that is multi-fuel capable it can detect and adjust compression based on a fuel's capabilities.

Ive been repairing and fixing junkers of cars, mowers, ATVs, generators, and more for 30 years and not once has bad gas stopped something from running. I only remove it if it was clearly having water raining into the tank. In every other case where I couldn't start something after sitting around for 5+ years, it was from the gas gumming up in the carb or the shitty diaphragm pump, which generally means there is little to no gas left to start with.

I wouldn't even suspect gas of ever being bad unless it was atleast a few years old. If the tank was open it could have evaporated, if the tank was closed it probably ain't great gas but I bet it would still run in anything but a high compression application.

[–] dotancohen 1 day ago
> detect and adjust compression based on a fuel's capabilities.

Spark, not compression.

[–] JshWright 15 hours ago
The spark timing determines how much compression is in the cylinder at the moment the fuel/air mixture is ignited. So, while it's technically true that it's the spark timing that's being adjusted, the thing that is being controlled for is the compression.
[–] dotancohen 2 hours ago
This explanation is an excuse, and does not pass muster. I remember adjusting spark timing with a timing light flashing on the harmonic balancer and turning the distributor by hand. Cars two decades before that, which I never personally serviced but have seen, had spark adjustment controls on the steering wheel.

The term was always called spark adjustment, never compression. Compression is the thing you worry about when milling the heads or exchanging oscillating components (rods, pistons) due to changing the physical geometry of the combustion chamber.

So yes, adjusting the spark timing does technically adjust how compressed the air/fuel mixture is at the moment of ignition. But the term used to describe it has always been "adjusting spark" or "adjusting spark timing" or "adjusting timing". Nobody ever refers to that as "adjusting compression" because the term compression is used to refer to something else.

[–] Ariarule 1 day ago
You're not wrong but this is commonly exaggerated: half a year with a stabilizer is entirely doable under reasonable conditions.
[–] ljf 1 day ago
Amuses me hear this - I ran a moped from a large tank of multi-year old petrol, and it got by fine. But maybe a modern car might be more picky?
[–] ssl-3 1 day ago
Last year, I let a fairly new portable generator with low hours on sit with gas in it for 6 months and it would not fire up. It wouldn't even sputter.

That was surprising to me because it was working quite well when parked, and I'm used to doing things like leaving lawnmowers outside continuously (including over the winter) without much trouble, but that's what happened anyway.

I drained the old fuel out and replaced with fresh, and it fired up on the first subsequent half-assed pull of the starter rope.

(Which reminds me: It's been six months again already. Time to see if it still works.)

[–] timr 1 day ago
Fuel stabilizer is cheap insurance for anything that overwinters with fuel in it -- motorcycles, boat engines, etc.

You have to put in in the tank and run it for a bit to make sure that the carbs don't have untreated fuel inside.

[–] mgerdts 1 day ago
A fairly new snowblower of mine had gas left in it over the summer. Before the first snowfall of the following winter it would not start. A dissection of the carburetor revealed numerous places where small passages were completely filled with a sticky gummy substance that had to be mechanically removed. After cleaning and reassembly, it fired right up with fresh gas. Maybe the old gas would have worked just fine once it could flow. Clearly having the gas sit in there had adverse effects.
[–] greenavocado 1 day ago
I just did this as well. Fired up my moped on 2 year old stabilized gas. Runs fine.
[–] bloomingeek 14 hours ago
Be sure and use a clear liquid stabilizer! The one I used had red dye in it and it gummed up the carburetor. Also, I never use any ethanol fuel in my generator.
[–] ryanbrunner 1 day ago
We use the (inboard) engine so rarely on my sailboat I'm sure we've gone 2 years on a tank without issue before.
[–] lostlogin 1 day ago
HN is full of maintenance purists, and I do know I should do better, but... A Corolla will work fine after sitting for a year or so and it’s once-or-twice-per-decade oil change seems to work ok.
[–] bloomingeek 14 hours ago
Keep in mind that different gas "engines" have different type fuel systems. Your Corolla has a high pressure fuel pump, which forces the fuel to pressurize the injectors. The fuel is ignited by a high voltage spark system. Small engines are a "pick up" type system, which can't tolerate almost any resistance. I run my portable generator for a half hour every other month. Except for using some red dye stabilizer (which gummed up the carb), I've never had a failed start. I no longer use any stabilizer in my fuel.
[–] ssl-3 11 hours ago
Any Corolla made in the past ~35 years also has electronic fuel injection, with at least one O2 sensor as part of a feedback loop that seeks to keep the air/fuel ratio in-check. Intake air is metered and data about it is folded in for heedback.

Somewhat simplified: As long as the feedback loop demands an injector duty cycle that is within predetermined limits, it can compensate for and run reasonably well on gas that burns relatively poorly (for whatever reason it does) by simply sending more fuel into the holes.

Conditions that produce pinging are further sought to be thwarted by using a knock sensor for additional feedback.

A Corolla has a lot of stuff going for it that can help deal with fuel variations and issues in ways that a majority of small engines are completely incapable of.

It tends to resolve to: Climb in, turn key, engine starts easily, and car drives fine -- just like it has done thousands of times before.

[–] xattt 1 day ago
The Ford F150 Powerboost has an optional 7.2 kVA inverter, which I am not sure if there are any other vehicles that can do the same off a gas tank.

I am guessing that one of the use cases is a support unit to charge an EV just enough to get it to a charging station.

[–] jethro_tell 1 day ago
Ford has had options like this forever and it's usually targeted at farmers and ranchers, I think the first I've found was like a 77 or 78 f250 'rancher' that had a generator option on the main belt off the motor. The ads show a guy cutting boards with a skill saw to mend a fence or something.

edit: I think these also had a ford branded chainsaw over the wheel well on the other side of the engine bay.

[–] jcomp 1 day ago
Had to look this up, not great pics but very cool:

"The generator was called the Electric Power Pak. From 1969 to 1972, Ford offered a 2,500-watt underhood generator, mostly on the Contractor’s Special, though it could be special ordered on other trucks. It also wasn’t driven off the engine’s belt. It was a separate Onan generator with its own 5.5 hp air-cooled single-cylinder engine, feeding an outlet in the bed. It sat on the driver’s side splash pan. The package the commenter calls a “Rancher” is likely the Farm & Ranch Special, which is one of the trucks that came with it.

The chainsaw was real. Ford sold Ford-blue chainsaws from 1970 to about 1976. They were rebadged Ohlsson & Rice saws: the Eagle I/II and the smaller Hawk. A mount was also sold that held the saw on the F-250’s driver’s side inner fender"

https://www.fordification.com/tech/images/onan_brochure-phot... https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5601f99be4b059... https://www.fordification.com/tech/onan.htm

[–] jethro_tell 1 day ago
Nice find. It's been a long time since I've seen these so I did get some details wrong =/
[–] jcomp 1 day ago
I was actually quite impressed by how well you described a 50+ year old product and ad, a commendable recollection in my view
[–] stiiv 1 day ago
I have one, and I have powered my house with it on a few occasions. I made the purchase after a friend of mine ran his for four days straight. I always fill up the tank if there are storms coming.

When I was shopping in 2025, this was the only truck with that kind of output.

[–] vondur 1 day ago
I almost purchased that truck, but I needed a higher cargo capacity for my travel trailer, and the added batteries reduced it by 250lbs or so. The ability to plug a travel trailer directly into the truck and run it is really cool.
[–] mgerdts 1 day ago
2024 and later Toyota Tacomas (and 4Runners and Landcriusers, I think) with the hybrid iForce Max power train have a 120V 2400W outlet. It will run briefly from the traction battery before starting the engine to recharge.
[–] ericd 1 day ago
Solar panels can refill it during the day, and the car can keep your fridge and heat pump running through the night.
[–] srmatto 1 day ago
Can you actually run home appliances from a regular ICE car? My furnace blower uses ~1800 watts when it kicks in.
[–] zardo 1 day ago
> Can you actually run home appliances from a regular ICE car?

You would need to add an accessory generator (which probably won't fit under the hood) and possibly upgrade the cooling system.

[–] ssl-3 1 day ago
Mine, too. It's pretty great as a car. Gas goes in one hole, exhaust comes out of another, and the wheels go 'round and round. It's awesome.

As an electrical generator, it's really not very good. The alternator is rated at 120 Amps (bigger than many, smaller than others).

At 13.8v, that's only 1,656 Watts -- on a good day, with the engine wound up. But the engine won't be wound up. It will instead be idling. The output will be less than 1656 Watts.

It burns right around 0.6 gallons of gasoline per hour (ie 22kW!) while idling and doing ~nothing else. It holds 21 gallons of gas.

So the unachievable best-case of idling-and-doing-no-real-work means that if it starts with a full tank of fuel, it will run out in 35 hours.

And in the real world, it will be doing work since that's the whole point of the exercise. It will therefore use somewhat more than its do-nothing 0.6 gallons per hour idle consumption.

We can ignore the longevity issues of treating a gas-fired vehicle as a stationary generator (these are expensive parts that are getting abnormally heat-soaked) because this is a temporary solution to a temporary problem, but as a practical matter: I'll still need to fill it up with gas, however I do that[1], about every day.

And, sure: That can be a way to solve some problems. With a decent inverter stashed out of the weather, connected with appropriately-big cables, I can probably use it to run the gas-fired furnace, the fridge and freezer, some lights, and some digital entertainment. Maybe it can't run all of that at the same time, but I'm smart and I'll manage.

The gas-fired car probably is useful, as long as I can drive somewhere and fill it back up.

---

Or: I could just plug stuff into an appropriate EV. It can sit there quietly being the giant battery that it is, and I can drive it out every couple/three days, or maybe just once per week as some suggest, to fill it back up.

It won't have an idle baseload of anywhere near the equivalent of 0.6 gallons of gasoline and it will therefore respond well to intermittent, dynamic loads like heat and refrigeration.

The EV is probably more-useful, as long as I can drive somewhere and charge it back up.

---

[1]: Sure, sure. I can carry a large quantity of gasoline to make the trips more-worthwhile. I can even store some locally (it's a pain to keep it fresh, but do-able).

If I were into that kind of prepping then what would be my practical limit? An extra 40 gallons, for ~60 overall? Great! Now I can run the car/house combo for 3 days before heading back out, and the EV still probably wins on this metric.

[–] dj_gitmo 7 hours ago
There are PHEVs that are designed to work quite well as a backup power since the engine kicks on occasionally to charge a large battery.
[–] ssl-3 5 hours ago
There are? Cool!

That'd be a great option to explore!

Regular cars are very inefficient at the job. Mine maths out to somewhere around 7% efficiency from fuel-to-electrical-power (and without yet involving the necessary inverter).

But for generating electrical power, PHEVs have very different tricks than a typical-and-pedestrian sleepy belt-driven alternator has.

Any pointers on a candidate model, or range of models, that include this function as a built-in intent?

---

I was tempted to get into the maths of using a regular gas-fired car intermittently to charge batteries. Maybe with something like an Anker Solix that has enough surge capacity to start a normal-ish furnace blower or fridge compressor, and can accept ~800W of power from a running car's 12v system for charging and/or output.

The temptation persists to write further about that kind of concept at some point, but the previous comment was getting long-enough that people tend to tune out anyway.

---

Except, as an aside: After the 2012 derecho where my neighborhood was without power for a couple of weeks, a neighbor down the block from me parked a minty-looking John Deere tractor in his driveway. This was connected, via PTO, to a rather beefy generator.

That combination (a tractor with a PTO is meant to do stationary-engine duty while doing significant work) sure did look expensive to keep going.

But it was still humming along every time I went past, so it must have been working for him.

(And during that outage, the big corpo gas station just a few blocks further out grew a genset the size of a shipping container that powered their operation. After they got that going, which took a couple of days from the start of the blackout, they were running very normally. IIRC it took them more days to get it disconnected and shut down than to get it delivered and set up, but it worked, and we all had fuel nearby.)

[–] s1artibartfast 1 day ago
Genuinely curious what you mean by this.