Tesla Model 3 revealed

[Tuna]

kambites said:

No-one is saying that the grid is going to go 100% solar any more than they're saying cars are all going to go EV.

No, of course not. The trouble is that the more optimistic predictions assume we can count all the benefits twice. We'll get the energy capacity of renewables at the peak time of year, the storage capacity of EVs to even it all out, the ideal time of day to charge them all, the smoothest average of mileage (no bank holiday getaways!), the current subsidies and spare capacity, free charging stations at work (but charging at night!) and so on.

That's really all that I object to. I'm comfortable with the idea of EVs taking off, with new technology and cleaner energy sources - but I get very unhappy when people assume that because they can identify individual benefits that they sweep all of the challenges off the board. This isn't (yet) a solved problem, and getting there is going to take quite a while, no doubt with bumps along the way.

[otolith]

kambites said:

One good thing about EVs is that with the average driver only needing a couple of hours of charging a day, they can start up and shut down as supply and demand on the grid waxes and wanes. Renewables (with the exception of hydroelectrics) have their issues for domestic supply but for EVs they work fairly well

And geothermal:


http://www.atlanticsuperconnection.com

[kambites]

Tuna said:

No, of course not. The trouble is that the more optimistic predictions assume we can count all the benefits twice.

This is true, although to be fair to the advocates, the detractors tend to count all the negatives twice too.

When we get an EV (and it's almost certainly a "when" not an "if" now), at least 95% of the charging will be done at night in our garage. I'd see us using public charging points maybe twice a year.

[TransverseTight]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Yes, but when are batteries least efficient? In the winter. When do people have the heating on most? In the winter.
It's a bit like going to a hotel for a room on bank holiday weekend and they say, "On average we're only 70% full so why don't you come back on Wednesday?".

I've spent over 12 years working in the utilities sector, so though I chuck some more comments in to help clear things up..

The spare capacity has the same swing in winter, there's just more base load on line. IF you download the data from the Templar website you can see the numbers in the xls. can't remember off the top of my head but summer it's something like 30 to 50GW and winter is 50 to 70. so overnight 20GW x 6 hours = 120Gwh x 4 miles per kWh avg, = 480 million miles per day available from existing infrastructure. OR 48 miles for 10 million people doing moderate commutes.

Emissions actually drop as power stations are much more efficient and turning fuel into power than an car engine, even with grid losses. ANd not all electric comes from coal... Which has 800g/kWh where as the grid average is 350g/km. Meaning an EV doing 4 miles kWH gets (6.4km/kWh) gets 54g/km. Well below even the best ICE. Average grid emissions are still dropping as more renewable power is added. So an EV you buy in 2016 will get lower emissions as it gets older.

Electric prices are likely to drop as a result.. Having a plant running for longer I.e. Overnight drops maintenance costs and gets a better return on capital investments. I've been told by a CCGT engineer a new plant can be built in 18 months once permits and financing are in place. Given all the coal plants are getting closed and there's then an empty plot it's not hard to imagine where they might stick some to support the renewable industry when it's not sunny or windy. CCGTS are cheap to build (relatively) but expensive to run. So they work well together. Add some nukes and you have reliable low carbon power system to build on... We need to get all energy from renewables not just what we use currently. Think home heating, manufacturing process heat and freight...

Check out wrightspeed work on electrifying trucks...
http://www.wrightspeed.com/the-route-powertrain

And Siemens work on making them go long distances...
http://w3.siemens.com/topics/global/en/electromobi...


As to using EVs to feed back it's unlikely. Automotive batteries are expensive as they aren't tied to a single location and need to cope with crashing. More likely is stationary storage. But EVs will be able to mop up excess wind and solar and to stop charging with pricing signals. If I told you it's possible to get 80p/KWh for switching off a steady load for 2 consecutive half hour periods would you be surprised? you only pay 5-15p/kWh depending. On time of day.

As mentioned previously Smart metering means you can have all sorts of tariff in future. Will be interesting to see what OFGEM allow after the recent Competition and markets authority review. 2 years ago OFGEM limited the number of tariff to 5 per supplier ..queue millions of pound of work (some part funded my i3). Now it all has to go back the other way.

The last thing I'd like to cover for all the Naysayers is long distance power transmission.
deserted is a large initiative to use CSP ie solar thermal in the deserts to ship power back up to Europe. they only need an area about the size of Wales IIRC.
http://www.desertec.org/

Getting the power back isn't a fantasy. HVDC already exists. see in places like Canada and China so get remote hydro power several thousand km back to the cities. A few in this list are sending 6GW+ over 1500km. Nothing to stop us building 5 or 6 or 20. Ever noticed all these pylons

Nothing needs to be build by the end of the decade,but we could start one or two things.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HVDC_proje...

[rscott]

The power station emissions -
Are they real world measured emissions or VW-style measured?

[kambites]

rscott said:

The power station emissions -
Are they real world measured emissions or VW-style measured?

Grams of CO2 per unit energy is constant for a given fuel as long as efficiency is constant and power stations get pretty close to that. I'd be surprised if the CO2 figures for a given power station are off by more than a couple of percent either way.

I'd be fascinated to know what the actual average CO2/km is for private cars in the UK.

Edited by kambites on Saturday 30th April 19:47

[Blaster72]

TransverseTight said:

The last thing I'd like to cover for all the Naysayers is long distance power transmission.
deserted is a large initiative to use CSP ie solar thermal in the deserts to ship power back up to Europe. they only need an area about the size of Wales IIRC.
http://www.desertec.org/

Getting the power back isn't a fantasy. HVDC already exists. see in places like Canada and China so get remote hydro power several thousand km back to the cities. A few in this list are sending 6GW+ over 1500km. Nothing to stop us building 5 or 6 or 20. Ever noticed all these pylons smile

That may be simplifying things ever so much, to fund covering an area the size of Wales with solar panels and build a distribution system through many hostile areas isn't exactly a simple undertaking. Nice idea but to be filed in the folder with other pie in the sky schemes for the moment I think. You'd also need an army of people cleaning these solar panels if you're going to build it in the desert. Nice job for someone if they don't die doing it.

As for just building a couple of nuke's - also laughable. We can't even build one extra yet and that's with a French owner power company and huge Chinese investment. New nuke's are 20 - 30 year projects when the politicians get involved.

Good news though, looks like the off peak energy supply we already have can cope fine to some extent for the foreseeable future.

The biggest threat is lack of take up and a poor charging structure. Ask any Leaf owner how many Ecotricity charging stations are broken and just how long it takes to get through on their 9-5 helpline. That needs huge investment and not just the odd station here and there. 2 or 3 charging bays in every petrol station would be a good start. They'd sell loads of snacks and coffee while people are kicking their heels waiting for the charge to complete.

This is where the Model 3 appeals to me, if they could nail a real word worst case 250 mile range I just couldn't see why I'd need an ICE car. Almost there.

[Mr GrimNasty]

Transverse lives in some sort of parallel fantasy universe, I'm used to his meanderings from the climate threads.

Meanwhile concentrated solar is failing to deliver (see Ivanpah plant) in the real world, and only succeeding in melting/vaporizing thousands of birds.

And as a recent research paper concludes in regards solar PV in Europe etc. when it is honestly costed "an electrical supply system based on today’s PV technologies cannot be termed an energy source, but rather a non-sustainable energy sink".

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S...

Wind is just as useless/impractical, last year wind suppliers were paid 500M Euro in Germany NOT to supply power because they were producing it at the wrong times risking unbalancing the grid - and yet when energy is required in cold anticyclonic winter conditions, they produce absolutely nothing at all. Germany's fossil fuel use is not even decreasing. But millions can't afford their energy bills and industry has to be rebated.

Venezuela is awash with fossil fuels, but now the lights have gone out, as their renewables failed to deliver.

Like all these things battery cars are just the wrong engineering solution, and only made possible by vast waste of other people's money, and political interference.

When the subsidies dry up and/or the penny drops, they will just go away and die.

[kambites]

Mr GrimNasty said:

Like all these things battery cars are just the wrong engineering solution, and only made possible by vast waste of other people's money, and political interference.

I don't understand why you think there has to be a single "right" solution? Battery EVs are currently a correct solution for part of the problem; ICEs are a correct solution for another part of the problem; hybrids yet another;... we don't have to pick just one.

For me, EVs don't have to compete with ICE powered cars on price because for our family car requirements they are simply better. At the moment they're too expensive to justify the relatively small practical advantage they offer for us, but the Model-3 may well change that. For every person the balance of value of each technology will differ.

Edited by kambites on Saturday 30th April 20:38

[mondeoman]

kambites said:

Mr GrimNasty said:

Like all these things battery cars are just the wrong engineering solution, and only made possible by vast waste of other people's money, and political interference.

I don't understand why you think there has to be a single "right" solution? Battery EVs are currently a correct solution for part of the problem; ICEs are a correct solution for another part of the problem; hybrids yet another;... we don't have to pick just one.

For me, EVs don't have to compete with ICE powered cars on price because for our family car requirements they are simply better. At the moment they're too expensive to justify the relatively small practical advantage they offer for us, but the Model-3 may well change that. For every person the balance of value of each technology will differ.

Edited by kambites on Saturday 30th April 20:38

I was just about to pick up on that - I dont see EV as a wrong engineering solution, as long as they aren't subsidised.

[Hugh Jarse]

There are lots of factors here, and some peripheral ones that will come into play.
One of which is these people who were commuting 50 miles per day spending £6 on fuel are suddenly @1500 better off per year not including simplified servicing. Spending that on solar panels, heat exchangers, ground pumps, wind turbines at home over five years will reduce home energy consumption. We have all recently switched from cathode ray TVs & filament lights to LEDS. £7500 will buy plenty of nice renewable energy things.

[Very Dave]

k-ink said:

Blaster72 said:

Looks like Ford are joining the party and have bought a Model X to play with

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-28/...

Ford have only just started looking into electric and claim they want to be leaders. Good luck with that!

I'm not sure if you are being serious or not...

1999 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_TH!NK
2010 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azure_Transit_Connec...
2011 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Focus_Electric

etc..

(or does it have to be a hatchback to count....?)

[kambites]

mondeoman said:

I was just about to pick up on that - I dont see EV as a wrong engineering solution, as long as they aren't subsidised.

They wont be subsidised indefinitely, at least not directly. They will probably retain tax advantages.

[AnotherClarkey]

Very Dave said:

k-ink said:

Blaster72 said:

Looks like Ford are joining the party and have bought a Model X to play with

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-28/...

Ford have only just started looking into electric and claim they want to be leaders. Good luck with that!

I'm not sure if you are being serious or not...

1999 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_TH!NK
2010 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azure_Transit_Connec...
2011 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Focus_Electric

etc..

(or does it have to be a hatchback to count....?)

Those are three magnificently successful programs you have highlighted there.

[k-ink]

I am not an expert on the history of Ford's failed attempts at electric cars. I was merely reacting to the article posted above, which seemed to indicate they only just looked at a Tesla and decided to join in. If you have other information to hand which backs up their bravado of leading the way in a few years feel free to share.

[modeller]

k-ink said:

I am not an expert on the history of Ford's failed attempts at electric cars. I was merely reacting to the article posted above, which seemed to indicate they only just looked at a Tesla and decided to join in. If you have other information to hand which backs up their bravado of leading the way in a few years feel free to share.

Ford like GM and the others have just done the minimum to meet CAFE so they can continue to sell there. Looks like Tesla are disrupting the status quo.

[Tuna]

k-ink said:

I am not an expert on the history of Ford's failed attempts at electric cars. I was merely reacting to the article posted above, which seemed to indicate they only just looked at a Tesla and decided to join in. If you have other information to hand which backs up their bravado of leading the way in a few years feel free to share.

So far as I'm aware there's not a lot of special sauce in Tesla's cars (and Musk has opened the patents that they have generated). The motors and batteries are not dramatically innovative. All the evidence is that what Telsa has done that no other manufacturer has, is to maximise government grants and subsidies and dramatically scale up production to the point where economies of scale kick in. In that respect, they're not doing something that cannot be reproduced.

Equally, most of the major manufacturers and a lot of the independent engineering firms that support them have been experimenting with alternative fuels and engines for decades - from before the fuel crisis in the 70's to the current day. Gas turbines, multi fuel, hydrogen, electric, hybrid. Just because you haven't seen them on the forecourt doesn't mean they haven't been developed.

But here's the thing. For most of them, the incredible cheapness and ubiquity of petrol has made alternative fuels completely uneconomic. Why build a car that no-one wants to buy? However nearly every manufacturer knows that will change (peak oil has been predicted for years). It's just a question of when.

The advent of massive lithium ion battery production for electronic gizmos has changed the game. Telsa has taken full advantage of that and accelerated it. If you really think the major manufacturers are going to be unable to respond in the five years it's going to take Tesla to deliver on their initial orders of the Model 3, you're not paying attention. The limiting factor has been price, not technology for at least the last decade.

And if you don't believe me, re-read the stuff about the Chevrolet Bolt earlier in the thread. It's going to be available before the Telsa, pretty much matches it's specs and is price competitive. What did Chevrolet find so surprising about the Model 3? Not the technology, but the low price Telsa has achieved for the battery.

[FurtiveFreddy]

Tuna said:

So far as I'm aware there's not a lot of special sauce in Tesla's cars (and Musk has opened the patents that they have generated). The motors and batteries are not dramatically innovative. All the evidence is that what Telsa has done that no other manufacturer has, is to maximise government grants and subsidies and dramatically scale up production to the point where economies of scale kick in. In that respect, they're not doing something that cannot be reproduced.

Equally, most of the major manufacturers and a lot of the independent engineering firms that support them have been experimenting with alternative fuels and engines for decades - from before the fuel crisis in the 70's to the current day. Gas turbines, multi fuel, hydrogen, electric, hybrid. Just because you haven't seen them on the forecourt doesn't mean they haven't been developed.

But here's the thing. For most of them, the incredible cheapness and ubiquity of petrol has made alternative fuels completely uneconomic. Why build a car that no-one wants to buy? However nearly every manufacturer knows that will change (peak oil has been predicted for years). It's just a question of when.

The advent of massive lithium ion battery production for electronic gizmos has changed the game. Telsa has taken full advantage of that and accelerated it. If you really think the major manufacturers are going to be unable to respond in the five years it's going to take Tesla to deliver on their initial orders of the Model 3, you're not paying attention. The limiting factor has been price, not technology for at least the last decade.

And if you don't believe me, re-read the stuff about the Chevrolet Bolt earlier in the thread. It's going to be available before the Telsa, pretty much matches it's specs and is price competitive. What did Chevrolet find so surprising about the Model 3? Not the technology, but the low price Telsa has achieved for the battery.

The Model 3 lead time seems to be going up all the time. Now it's 5 years!

The reason why more people want to buy Teslas than anything else on offer currently is simple. They are more desirable.

[anonymous-user]

Horrendously ugly.
Tesla. If you add combustion engines to the EV's to create hybrids I would actually respect your vehicles. But no.

[otolith]