**Tesla Model S** The first nail in the internal combustions engines coffin?

[Del Lardo]

They're using standard off the shelf Panasonic 18650 Li-ion cells, but I can't easily find which ones. The only number I can find is "over 7000". They have both cooling and heating available, to maintain optimum temperature.

Where are you getting "45kw" from?

There's three battery pack options, 40kW-h, 60kW-h & 85kW-h according to the reviews I've seen.

The Car and Driver review below is very informative and personally I'm rather excited by it, the 300 mile range makes the S a far more viable proposition in the UK than the US and I'd buy it for the door handles alone

 

[Jonnycoupe]

As its a battery vehicle cell imbalance is much easier to manage as the BMW should be managing each cell such that when full and on a low trickle which should be atleast once a week it can dump the energy from the full cells into a resistor rather than the cell.

Any idea on the cells? 18650 could be in the region of 3.7V and 3Ah? So over 7000 for the big pack is pretty mental assuming thats what they will go with?

Of course the number os cells makes such a thorough BMS mroe difficult. Have they actually started using a 12V battery for the backup system and alarms etc?

I stand by the fact that big screen is a HMI disater in that car aswell, no feedback or feel other than looking at it!

 

[thepharcyde]

That is one massive car pc

 

[Skilid]

That is one massive car pc

Looks carp IMO

 

[Angilion]

As its a battery vehicle cell imbalance is much easier to manage as the BMW should be managing each cell such that when full and on a low trickle which should be atleast once a week it can dump the energy from the full cells into a resistor rather than the cell.

It struck me as odd that he so completely evaded the question. Management of a battery pack made from a large number of small cells is essentially what Tesla does. If he'd said, in essence, "It's not a problem because we've dealt with it", that would have been a believable answer.

Any idea on the cells?

Only the manufacturer (Tesla have a deal with Panasonic) and the physical size (18650).

18650 could be in the region of 3.7V and 3Ah?

mAh, surely? EDIT: Ignore me, I an under-caffeinated. A confusion units. Using Ah makes more sense in this context, but small battery capacity is usually quoted in mAh and I mixed the two up.

So over 7000 for the big pack is pretty mental assuming thats what they will go with?

Yes, it is pretty mental. The pack is huge and when new has a capacity of 85KWh. Fair play to Tesla - they know their batteries. The Model S has the whole lot as a single removable unit, so they're considering swapping as well as charging.

Of course the number os cells makes such a thorough BMS mroe difficult. Have they actually started using a 12V battery for the backup system and alarms etc?

Not a clue. There's a lot more advertising and advocacy than details. It's not just a matter of utterly refusing to talk about the real running costs. There's a scarcity of detail in pretty much everything. It may be a production car, but they're selling a concept.

I stand by the fact that big screen is a HMI disater in that car aswell, no feedback or feel other than looking at it!

What would you have instead?

EDIT: Do you know how it would be possible to charge a battery pack with 90KW without degrading it more than charging it with 3KW? I was under the impression that it was unavoidable, at least with with Li-ion.

 

[Angilion]

There's three battery pack options, 40kW-h, 60kW-h & 85kW-h according to the reviews I've seen.

The Car and Driver review below is very informative and personally I'm rather excited by it, the 300 mile range makes the S a far more viable proposition in the UK than the US and I'd buy it for the door handles alone

I'd be swayed more by the quite different warranties on the battery pack. The 85KW model has a much better warranty on the battery pack than the two lower-capacity models.

Although I think that the vast running cost of batteries still makes EVs impractical in comparison with ICEVs even with the massive (and temporary) imbalance in fuel tax. Add that to the huge difference in purchase price and the total cost of owning and using an EV is so much higher than that of a comparable ICEV that it wouldn't be practical even if it had a 3000 mile range.

In time, yes, EVs will very likely become a better buy. But not now, not by a long chalk.

 

[Elrein]

Am I right in saying this thing is charged by electricity??

If so unless the world starts building more nuclear power plants / wind farms / hydro elec blah blah blah where do u think that electricity is coming from??

My 25mpg 3.0ltr Combustion engine can kiss the worlds ass because by the time I'm done pumping the earth full of CO2 there will still be 100's of years of good old natural fuel left to burn

 

[Hamish]

Am I right in saying this thing is charged by electricity??

If so unless the world starts building more nuclear power plants / wind farms / hydro elec blah blah blah where do u think that electricity is coming from??

My 25mpg 3.0ltr Combustion engine can kiss the worlds ass because by the time I'm done pumping the earth full of CO2 there will still be 100's of years of good old natural fuel left to burn

Yes, the world needs to build more power plants but the point is that they are far more efficient, the demand can be balanced to non peak hours (charging overnight), the polution (if any) is not being pumped into the streets and can be easily moved to whatever source is best - wind, nuclear, whatever, whereas cars need to be oil based.

In the future people will laugh at how old fashioned cars used to be. They'll talk about when we had that huge lump sticking out of the front of our car with a huge oily, noisy machine in with thousands of moving parts in which needs servicing every year, had to keep running even when stopped or in traffic and pumped out fumes into the street.
They'll talk about how instead of just plugging in when you got home you had to go out of your way to pour expensive fuel in your car and it only got 25mpg instead of 100+. Then on long journeys you can just pull into a service station and charge up in 10 minutes while grabbing a coffee.

Nowadays people yearn for the V8 sound but once electric sports cars hit the market people will yearn for the whine of a powerful electric motor, with constant torque rather than an engine which only has power between 2-6000rpm and lots of gears. 2-3seconds 0-60 will become the norm for performance cars with constant accelleration, almost silent cruising and 60,000 mile service intervals.

People seem to want to stick to petrol just because it is the status quo, but when you think about it electric is better in every way apart from the problems of range and charging time which are rapidly progressing in technology.

 

[Elrein]

Good reply but what your talking about is a rather long way away...

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Yes, the world needs to build more power plants but the point is that they are far more efficient, the demand can be balanced to non peak hours (charging overnight), the polution (if any) is not being pumped into the streets and can be easily moved to whatever source is best - wind, nuclear, whatever, whereas cars need to be oil based.

A few thoughts:
- Whilst a power station might be efficient, isn't the transmission of that via power lines hopelessly inefficient, such that you lose a large % of power along the way? Sorry, unsure of the figures.
- Demand cannot be that easily balanced. Power stations are huge. Compare that to a car which is turned on and used ONLY whilst it's running
- Polution is still created. Ask the Swedes how they feel about us dumping acid rain on their forests for decades.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have centralised power production that is efficient and means that electric cars are viable, unfortunately:
- Most of the existing methods are not efficient, safe AND polution positive. Oil power stations use natural resources. Nuclear is a political nightmare, despite it having the potential to be the closest thing we have to a power saviour.
- Fusion looks like the only real potential solution, but we're not close on that yet.

 

[Hamish]

A few thoughts:
- Whilst a power station might be efficient, isn't the transmission of that via power lines hopelessly inefficient, such that you lose a large % of power along the way? Sorry, unsure of the figures.

Wiki seems to suggest that transmission losses are quite small - around 6.5%. compared to a car engine which has an efficiency of around 18-20% it is pretty much a given that electric cars will be overall more efficient.

- Demand cannot be that easily balanced. Power stations are huge. Compare that to a car which is turned on and used ONLY whilst it's running

With modern electronics - internet connected cars, and smart meters, people can set their cars to charge when demand is lowest and electricity is cheapest, this balances demand and increases efficiency.[/QUOTE]

- Polution is still created. Ask the Swedes how they feel about us dumping acid rain on their forests for decades.

Yes pollution is still created depending on the source of the power. However there is the advantage that it can be moved away from population centres. Also even modern coal fired power stations have a lot of pollution scrubbing equipment so they pollute less than in the past.
Another disagvantage of electric cars I forgot to mention before is that there is a big impact in manufacuring the batteries. The mining, refining and transport of raw materials is a big problem currently.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have centralised power production that is efficient and means that electric cars are viable, unfortunately:
- Most of the existing methods are not efficient, safe AND polution positive. Oil power stations use natural resources. Nuclear is a political nightmare, despite it having the potential to be the closest thing we have to a power saviour.
- Fusion looks like the only real potential solution, but we're not close on that yet.

Yes very true, I don't think that electric cars will be a 'no brainer' over petrol for 10+ years and I doubt there will ever be a 'silver bullet' pollution free and cheap power solution.

 

[Bear]

Not today you couldn't we is the point. No idea what your 240v comment had to do with anything.

The only way I can see we could get close to be able to charge the batteries in the time they talk about is to bring 3phase supplies to people's homes.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

It's becoming clear, from previously undisclosed numbers, that a gallon of petrol uses around 8kWh from well to pump in energy to create. That's enough to drive a Leaf 30 miles before you can put it in a car to burn for 30miles...

Kinda makes petrol an energy carrier rather than fuel!

 

[Bear]

It's becoming clear, from previously undisclosed numbers, that a gallon of petrol uses around 8kWh from well to pump in energy to create. That's enough to drive a Leaf 30 miles before you can put it in a car to burn for 30miles...

Kinda makes petrol an energy carrier rather than fuel!

Who would have though Top Gear was ahead of the times in this respect.

 

[Angilion]

It's becoming clear, from previously undisclosed numbers, that a gallon of petrol uses around 8kWh from well to pump in energy to create. That's enough to drive a Leaf 30 miles before you can put it in a car to burn for 30miles...

Kinda makes petrol an energy carrier rather than fuel!

No, it doesn't. Or only in the sense that everything apart from nuclear is an energy carrier. In a very broad sense, it's all indirect solar power.

Also, a Leaf is rated at about 3 miles per KWh. 8KWh is not enough to go 30 miles unless you're tailgating a lorry, coasting downhill or whatever. Regenerative braking might or might not generate enough on the way to get the 30 miles, but if you're using regenerative braking then you're not doing the 30 miles on 8KWh.

You're quoting unsubstantiated numbers that your side is exposing ("previously undisclosed numbers") and running away with conclusions from those numbers. You're indulging in unfettered advocacy.

 

[Angilion]

[..]
People seem to want to stick to petrol just because it is the status quo, but when you think about it electric is better in every way apart from the problems of range and charging time which are rapidly progressing in technology.

Cost. EVs are much more expensive than comparable ICEVs, both in purchase price and running costs.

Infrastructure. We couldn't support a swap to EVs, neither in generation nor in distribution.

Resources. It wouldn't be possible to make enough batteries anyway, at any cost.

Right now, petrol is better in almost every way for cars. Power delivery is better with electricity, in comparison with an ICE with comparable peak power output.

Electricity might become better in every way at some unknown point in the future, perhaps. But it's not now.

As for noise...whining is not widely considered an attractive noise and that's unlikely to change. The roaring of controlled explosions has a definite advantage over whining in this context.

EDIT: I'd argue that range and charging time are one of the easiest problems to overcome because they can be evaded. There's no need to figure out ways to throw a megawatt into a car (and it would take a MW or more to reach the range and charging times people are after). The way to evade the charge and range issue is with battery swapping stations in the same way that we have petrol stations now. It doesn't matter if a battery takes hours to charge if it's doing it in a charging station and not in your car. As long as charging stations have enough batteries to maintain an adequate supply of charged batteries, the charging time doesn't matter. That would make "refueling" as quick and convenient for an EV as it is for an ICEV, with charging being a bonus extra option rather than a problem. Of course, we'd need to be able to make many more batteries and generate and distribute much more electricity. Batteries with a tenth of the weight and size would be a good idea too - machinery can handle table-top size batteries weighing close to a tonne, but the process would be a lot more efficient if they were the size of a large bag and weighed <100Kg.

 

[Angilion]

[..]
- Fusion looks like the only real potential solution, but we're not close on that yet.

How close is close? ITER is being built right now and that should be able to generate a 500MW output from a 50MW input. A bona fide fusion power station is probably about 30 years away.

 

[PhillyDee]

How close is close? ITER is being built right now and that should be able to generate a 500MW output from a 50MW input. A bona fide fusion power station is probably about 30 years away.

Nope, its 50 years away, it has been 50 years away for the last 50 years. They are still in the initial phase of testing, and it will be a long long time before fusion is even viable. It may never be! Hopefully in our lifetime!

 

[Jonnycoupe]

Not a clue. There's a lot more advertising and advocacy than details. It's not just a matter of utterly refusing to talk about the real running costs. There's a scarcity of detail in pretty much everything. It may be a production car, but they're selling a concept.

What would you have instead?

EDIT: Do you know how it would be possible to charge a battery pack with 90KW without degrading it more than charging it with 3KW? I was under the impression that it was unavoidable, at least with with Li-ion.

The only reason I mention the 12V is that the Roadster had somewhat of a flaw with having no 12V and the backups fed by the main the HV battery through a DC-DC.

The degradation is not fully understood still but the main advisor is you go from your depth of discharge and only come back up to 80%SoC to avoid spiking the more 'full' cells. 90kW on that big battery which im sure will be that new tech they spoke of is just over 1C..... essentially not a massive deal.

in terms of HMI, Haptic feedback, ie a dial for temp and and fan speed, or clicky hard keys for main features - ie windscreen defroster.

Having to look down at the screen for every feature is not great, there is a reason mainstream OEMs stick to proper switchgear for frequently used operations.

 

[Yaayuh!]

It's very close to the perfect replacement i think. When you can get that sort of performance and can still get it over 300 miles range + 15-20 minutes charging, then we'll be sorted.