Saturday, 23 September 2017

Greased Lightning

Since the first days of Henry Ford's Model T Americans have had a love affair with their cars. After our home they are the biggest ticket item in our budget. We have sung songs in their honor and they have starred in our movies. They are an expression of who we are. Recently my readers, you know who you are, expressed an interest in discussing the future of electric vehicles (EV's). So I have done some research and have found a few things that may be of interest and pertinent to some of the issues raised, such as battery operation.

This first video is a nice overview of how an electric car, specifically the Tesla Model S, works.




Obviously the battery in the Tesla does not lend itself to convenient swapping, so in this case the recharge is critical. In this video the various options are discussed.



As you no doubt noticed the time needed to recharge the battery is rather, well, long. At least compared to simply filling up your tank with gas. There is also the fact that the charge doesn't last for a lengthy road trip, meaning you will need to stop and recharge, adding more time to the trip. You will also note that there is the issue of making sure the battery doesn't get too hot.

In this video that lengthy charge time is addressed.



Hmm...yes, there do seem to be some issues with trying to lower the charge time. That brings us back to swapping out the battery at a charging/swapping station. Apparently that is not impossible as it was tried in Israel, according to this article.


I noticed that within that article there is a link to another about charging highways. That is, creating the infrastructure within the highway itself to recharge the battery as you drive. But, like other options, there are drawbacks. Not least of which is how a pacemaker would react to the magnetic charge.

One thing that the author of the article mentioned in the last paragraph was about watching what India and China do. I found that interesting because it does seem that in the case of EV's the leaders will not be in the United States.

Whatever happens in the future may depend upon whether or not EV's can find a place in the hearts of those who have always just loved to drive, as far or as fast as they can.

Or maybe as creatively as they can.  This movie had some serious driving in it!



217 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 217 of 217
Petes said...

"My point was that comparing the energy theoretically available from fossil fuels to the energy actually available to battery powered automobiles was a fraudulent comparison."

And you plucked that point out of yore ass. It dudn't mean anything. Nothing whatsoever. And you accuse me of deliberately misleading, ya clown?

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "And you accuse me of deliberately misleading…?"

Yes.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
And it's not me you're trying to con.

Petes said...

LOL. Every argument with the Chump eventually ends up with him makin' some asinine statement that he just repeats over and over again ad infinitum, without the least justification or provision of a single screed of evidence. Seems like we get to that point ever more rapidly these days. Seems like we're there now.

Hint for y'all: it may save ya from havin' to admit to gittin' yore ass whupped (again), but it prolly don't look like a very clever debatin' tactic to "yore audience".

I'm off. Have fun with yerself.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Petes said...

For Lynnette and Marcus, (and I'm afraid I'm gonna just have to talk over Lee, 'cos he's just gonna shit all over the conversation whether I ignore him or not), the salient point is that it looks on the face of it like an EV can travel further on a unit of energy than an ICE. But when you consider that charging the EV incurs certain significant and unavoidable inefficiencies, it turns out that's not true.

(One could make various qualifications to this statement if one wanted to consider all the ways that electricity could be produced, but is true by and large).

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "…it prolly don't look like a very clever debatin' tactic…"

You seem to still think this is a debate.  You made that same mistake earlier.  (Petes @ Mon Sep 11, 07:22:00 pm) (prior thread)
You do not seem to learn from your mistakes.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Here's a simple point.

      "A fully charged 75 kWh battery in a high-end EV contains the
      energy equivalent of only two gallons of gasoline.
"
      Petes @ Thu Sep 28, 02:16:00 am ↑↑ (previous page)

A Tesla sport model can go 350+ miles on full charge, roughly 75 kWh or (or there'bouts, so they claim)
A 2017 Corvette can go 44 miles on two gallons of gas.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Slight correction:  350± miles (more or less) for the Tesla model S; not necessarily 350+.  I probably should have looked that up before I estimated it at 350+.

Petes said...

As I said, Lynnette and Marcus, Lee will shit all over the conversation. For your benefit, I reiterate: it looks on the face of it like an EV can travel further on a unit of energy than an ICE. But when you consider that charging the EV incurs certain significant and unavoidable inefficiencies, it turns out that's not true.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
The internal combustion engine also incurs significant and unavoidable inefficiencies.  Petes knows this, but skips lightly past it.  It's not me he's trying to con.

Petes said...

As I said, Lynnette and Marcus, Lee will shit all over the conversation, and unfortunately insists on using each of his mistakes as an occasion for trolling, making it impossible to simply correct him. The miles per gallon (or unit energy) figure for any engine factors in all the losses. That's categorically not what we're discussing here. Lee doesn't understand that, and while I expect his error will slowly dawn on him it won't stop him trying to wreck the conversation.

So for your benefit (not his), I reiterate: ...charging the EV incurs certain significant and unavoidable inefficiencies. There are no analogous losses for the ICE.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...


      "I reiterate: ...charging the EV incurs certain significant
and unavoidable inefficiencies…
"

Now you're just bullshitting them because you think you can get away with it.  Charging the EV, as opposed to generating the power to create the charge in the first place, does not create a substantial power loss, unless one insists on using the ‘fast charge’ option, which will lose some power to heat generation.  (A point Lynnette made much earlier.)
And even a fast charge does not create energy losses sufficient to lower it to the equivalent of a comparable internal combustion engine.  (I.e. no way a Tesla S drops to the 22 mpg that a brand new Corvette turns in even when properly tuned and brand new.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Wanna dispute that?  Lets see your authorities on the subject.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "There are no analogous losses for the ICE."

And, of course, you lie.  There are indeed analogous, equivalent losses.  You lie.  One barrel of crude oil (42 gallons of crude) typically produces only 20 gallons of gasoline and an additional 11 gallons of alternate fuels (mostly diesel and similar products).  Ya lose almost 25% just in the distillation process, never mind the additional losses to leakage and evaporation.   link

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
"Ya lose almost 2O% just in the distillation process."

I'll drop back to bed now and be quicker on those things in the morning.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 217 of 217   Newer› Newest»