Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 12,234
- Location
- UK
Didn't we have this conversation last week?
I'm all for electric cars but....
- Thread starter swain90
- Start date
We did.
This thread has perfectly highlighted my point about how people are being seduced by the Tesla marketing to create an impression of the world that is quite far removed from reality.
Back on point though, has Musk layed out his plans for how he proposes recycling the 500,000 batteries he wants to produce a year?
This thread has perfectly highlighted my point about how people are being seduced by the Tesla marketing to create an impression of the world that is quite far removed from reality.
Back on point though, has Musk layed out his plans for how he proposes recycling the 500,000 batteries he wants to produce a year?
Fast overchargers that can do it in 30 minutes are one Hell of a lot more of a drain than regular overnight chargers that most ideas are based around. When people talk about fitting all parking spots with chargers that's a massive project in and of itself. But doing so with 30 minute overchargers, is a whole different prospect again! And even there, seriously - can you imagine a garage or service station where it takes 30 minutes to fill up? You're basically talking about having to replace every garage with a 100 car parking lot.
Or you can fill up a hydrogen car in under two minutes. Just sayin'.
I'm pro Hydrogen, btw. In case anybody didn't get that.
EDIT: I meant "superchargers". Thank you, Skeeter.
Last edited:
Just to clarify that remark. That was 14 million cars at once (there are about 35million cars in he U.K., doing an average 10miles a day). Obviously most cars wouldn't be charged at the same time. With today's average mileage you'd only need to charge about 1/7th of cars on the road each day. With the current cycle of power useage (higher useage during the day and in winter than at night and in summer), if cars were mostly charged at night you wouldn't really need any more electrical generating infrastructure.
That said, the rush hour peaks of electricity if we had recharging roadways may cause some problems...
I think we should just look more towards people not having to travel as much in general, people commuting 20-40 miles a day to sit at a desk and do something they could've done at home is ridiculous. I'm not saying completely do away with going in to work, but a lot of offices could look at having people work at home half the time.
No there are multiple EVs that can use "rapid chargers" eg CHAdeMO to get to an 80% charge in 30mins
CHAdeMOs are apparently only 50kw and they are by no means rare and are in most service stations.
It is. Hydrogen passes into a catalyst that breaks it into protons and electrons. the protons are attracted the to negative terminal on the other side seperated by some kind of membrane. The electrons flow round the circuit which gives the power. At the negative terminal the electrons, protons and the oxygen(supplied via another inlet) combine to produce water.
At least thats my basic understanding of it. The dangerous side comes from the tank of hydrogen needed to power it.
I always thought this would be a good idea. Massive tyres around cars. Less write offs and insurance claims for scuffs. I'd like to see someone get their shopping trolley past that(actually I wouldnt).
I think the main problem with hydrogen at the moment is the cost of storage AND more importantly the fact it takes significantly more energy to separate the bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen (or carbon, depending on source) molecules than we gain from it as fuel.
That's why nuclear fusion is so entwined with hydrogen fuel as a concept. If we can produce almost limitless clean, cheap energy then the formation of hydrogen fuel will be simple, clean and easy. At the moment it takes significant electricity (mostly generated from fossil fuels) to produce.
You could say the same thing about EV but as far as I'm were there is less "loss" of energy in electricity generation than hydrogen.
Last edited:
So change the model.
Do what musk is aiming to do, create a "full service" industry. He doesn't want the manufacturers interest to end when the car leaves the showroom, in fact the current open source patent system Tesla are operating on is to try and persuade other car manufacturers to start investing in infrastructure.
Essentially the model for refuelling your EV car will become similar to cash withdrawal systems at the moment, where you can go to your banks ATM and withdraw money for free, along with any other banks arm that is part of the link alliance.
Musks aim appears to be to get manufacturers to build the EV charging infrastructure With their money and provide it free to use for any manufacturers car in an alliance. Companies like BP and Shell (and the current EV charging companies) will be the equivalent to those charging ATMs you see in night clubs and corner shops that few people use.
With that system the infrastructure investment is part and parcel with the research and manufacturing costs of producing a car, rather than a third party trying to make money after plowing huge investment to into chargers.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,362
Electric cars with batteries is the solution. They are getting better all the time. Use renewables or nuclear to charge them.
Fast overchargers that can do it in 30 minutes are one Hell of a lot more of a drain than regular overnight chargers that most ideas are based around. When people talk about fitting all parking spots with chargers that's a massive project in and of itself. But doing so with 30 minute overchargers, is a whole different prospect again! And even there, seriously - can you imagine a garage or service station where it takes 30 minutes to fill up? You're basically talking about having to replace every garage with a 100 car parking lot.
Or you can fill up a hydrogen car in under two minutes. Just sayin'.
I'm pro Hydrogen, btw. In case anybody didn't get that.
EDIT: I meant "superchargers". Thank you, Skeeter.
It may be a big project, but it's not massive/impossible.
Where I currently live almost all newer public transport car parks (for commuters driving to and then swapping to light railway to get downtown) have power to every parking spot. They are designed for battery warmers so would not produce any where near enough power to charge a car, but a similar infrastructure is in.
Retrofitting similar systems to every car parking spot would be a massive challenge, admittedly. But then that would also be pointless. Instead it wouldn't be a huge job to start equipping new car parks with EV chargers. Gradually, over 20-30 years (the timespan EV cars would begin to become the main sellers) most car parks in the UK that could have chargers would have them.
Much like the proliferation of hydrogen, things don't need to be done overnight! The reality is it'll be a slow proliferation over decades.
One of the big problems with both hydrogen and EV is the electricity requirements. That will be an issue for both equally, especially if hydrogen fuel stations go with the local production model. Then again getting high voltage/high current power supply to an industrial unit is a common challenge many know all about,so is certainly not insurmountable.
80% on its own is a meaningless number though.
80% of a Leaf is like 50 miles. 80% of a Tesla is 170 miles.
and in what way does that change the statement you can get an 80% charge in 30 mins? or make the statement just marketing ?
and in what way does it make it untrue for anything other than Tesla.
Yes I understand that the power rating can increase /decrease the time but that changes nothing.
The infrastructure for charging is getting better and continues to get better.
At this point in time no electric vehicle is sensible for romping up and down the motorways including a Tesla but I genuinely believe that both batteries and charging will continue to get better.
Consider they get a nissan leaf or similar "family" car to be able to do 300 miles on a charge for roughly the same price as a petrol leaf.
Today a chadmo yes will only give it maybe 60 miles range in 30 mins , but lets just say they improve it a bit and can make that 80 miles in 30 mins.
But maybe chadmo gets replaced with chadmo 2 at 100Kw and it gets a 160 miles of range in 30 mins.
Or maybe just even 50 miles range for 5 mins charging.
At this point you have a family runabout that will do 450 miles with a 30 min stop and I can absolutely see this happening and I believe it is closer than most people think.
Consider they get a nissan leaf or similar "family" car to be able to do 300 miles on a charge for roughly the same price as a petrol leaf.
Today a chadmo yes will only give it maybe 60 miles range in 30 mins , but lets just say they improve it a bit and can make that 80 miles in 30 mins.
But maybe chadmo gets replaced with chadmo 2 at 100Kw and it gets a 160 miles of range in 30 mins.
Or maybe just even 50 miles range for 5 mins charging.
At this point you have a family runabout that will do 450 miles with a 30 min stop and I can absolutely see this happening and I believe it is closer than most people think.
What's also worth pointing out with today's electric cars is that most families will have two cars. Making one an EV (usually the smaller ones as Tesla are the only manufacturer really selling larger cars) just means if you need to do that 300 mile run you use the petrol car. The EV is the around town second car/ daily commuter...
I doubt there would be that many times someone with a leaf would regret buying it because of the range. The style and everything else, well I'd totally agree there...
I doubt there would be that many times someone with a leaf would regret buying it because of the range. The style and everything else, well I'd totally agree there...
We have a deposit down on a 5.4L V8 pickup, and have a petrol car, but in the nearish future I'd like to replace the petrol car with an EV model, because its a good option for every day use. That would leave the truck for the use it's intended - lugging big things around and for times when we are hundreds of km from the nearest power.
Totally agree they have won the future although hydrogen may pull a blinder at some point. My gut feeling however is in 30 years it'll probably be a mix of both. Electric for most and hydrogen for specific needs, such as those needing to carry/pull heavy loads, driving huge distances or travelling in the sticks/wilderness. If hydrogen doesn't take up properly then more efficient ICE will stay relevant for those situations. It is and almost certainly will be much more efficient to carry spare liquid fuel/fuel cells than a couple of extra battery packs, even in 30 years.
With the increase in efficiency (and reduction in engine size for similar power*) you'll easily be able to go 1500-2000 miles with 200-300kg of liquid fuel and carry a couple tonnes with you. It's very unlikely, even with current scientific research we will get batteries that will give you that much range for weight. Only hydrogen will come close.
*The new version of the above pickup has a 3.6L V6 that produces the same power but is about 20% more fuel efficient. It'll be a long time before you get an EV able to replace those engines unfortunately. But one positive, they are all designed to run on high percentage ethanol fuel as well (if you can currently find it...).
Totally agree they have won the future although hydrogen may pull a blinder at some point. My gut feeling however is in 30 years it'll probably be a mix of both. Electric for most and hydrogen for specific needs, such as those needing to carry/pull heavy loads, driving huge distances or travelling in the sticks/wilderness. If hydrogen doesn't take up properly then more efficient ICE will stay relevant for those situations. It is and almost certainly will be much more efficient to carry spare liquid fuel/fuel cells than a couple of extra battery packs, even in 30 years.
With the increase in efficiency (and reduction in engine size for similar power*) you'll easily be able to go 1500-2000 miles with 200-300kg of liquid fuel and carry a couple tonnes with you. It's very unlikely, even with current scientific research we will get batteries that will give you that much range for weight. Only hydrogen will come close.
*The new version of the above pickup has a 3.6L V6 that produces the same power but is about 20% more fuel efficient. It'll be a long time before you get an EV able to replace those engines unfortunately. But one positive, they are all designed to run on high percentage ethanol fuel as well (if you can currently find it...).
Last edited:
I honestly cant think of one "massive" benifit hydrogen has over petrol.