RE: Driven: Tesla Roadster
Discussion
PhillipM said:
kambites said:
What's that got to do with it? Yes it's a hopeless mode of transport, but so were the first few generations of cars. Given a choice between one of these and a 1900ish internal combustion powered car, I know which I'd rather be driving on a daily basis.
Given the condition a 1900-ish car would have to be in to be a daily driver, and hence the value, I'll take that one!
True, although you'd be walking a lot, at least you'd be rich. 
eldar said:
Mr Gear said:
eldar said:
bencollins said:
1880s journalist
"That benz contraption is rubbish and will never catch on, it does not gallop as fast as a horse and you cant use the exhaust on your begonias, Plus there is no clip clop sound, in fact it makes a different noise completely."
But prices will improve, as will battery energy density. We've yet to see how quickly this will take place.
The big problem is where to get the energy to power them - by 2015 we aren't going to be able to produce enough to meet our existing electricity consumption, let alone the additional transport load.
Until we sort out that, electric cars are really a niche market, I fear.
Night charging i.e. variable economy 7 style charging can be used. The coro cup of tea surge can be priced away by flexible pricing.
40 years development between 1885 and 1925 is gonna be a bit quicker these days, there were only about 5 rich countries back then, and only 3% rich in those countries.
The first cars are expensive, so was the first CD pl, cheap now arent they.
These first cars ARE value for money, as extremely collectible.
sinclair ZX80 vs Intel Pentium PC, 20 years.
Have a look at tram / train motors, fook me they are powerful.
Like the man above said, it is what it is, not a van or a continent crusher (yet). Brilliant that a US company is making the mainstream manufacturers look like idiots dragging their feet.
Lots of people doing renderings, hardly actually anything gets sold. Well done.
5 USA said:
bencollins said:
making the mainstream manufacturers look like idiots
Not at that price it's not!Electric cars and An Automotive Cul De Sac.
The only reason that some manufactures even bother with them is to keep the Ecomentalists off their backs.
Most have a Hybrid plan in hand IF it becomes necessary and will happily trot out such unfeasible non functioning prototypes to wow the gullible at motor shows etc.
For all the time this Eco clap trap has been going on only Toyota and Honda have bothered to make or continued with a commercially available and practical alternative powered car. (neither of which are particularly economical)
Why do you think that is?
If the recent leaked emails are anything to go by the whole Eco nonsense might be a thing of the past any time soon.
The only reason that some manufactures even bother with them is to keep the Ecomentalists off their backs.
Most have a Hybrid plan in hand IF it becomes necessary and will happily trot out such unfeasible non functioning prototypes to wow the gullible at motor shows etc.
For all the time this Eco clap trap has been going on only Toyota and Honda have bothered to make or continued with a commercially available and practical alternative powered car. (neither of which are particularly economical)
Why do you think that is?
If the recent leaked emails are anything to go by the whole Eco nonsense might be a thing of the past any time soon.
OK, why electric cars are the short term (15 years+) are not going to be practical in any significant (more than 2%) numbers in the UK.
The figures are for cars only.
Currently, around 32,000,000 cars in the UK, averaging 14,000 km/year and consuming 7.6 litres/100 km.
An IC powered car converts around 30% of the input into useful energy (moving, heater, lights, etc.)
An electric car converts around 36% of power station output to usable energy (moving, lights, heating. Losses are grid transmission, transformers/rectification, batteries & motors)
The average car then has an energy input of 8,500 KW, assuming fuel contains 10KW/litre (Petrol is 9KW, Diesel 10.9KW, so 10 is near enough).
So an electric car for Mr. Average will require 6,800 KW.
If we swap 1% of cars from oil to electricity, 320,000 cars, that is an annual generation capacity of 2.176 GW.
The UK has around 80GW generating capacity, producing 400,000GW a year out of a theoretical 700,000GW if there were no power losses, plant breakdown, repair etc.
We actually use about 360,000GW which sound like 40,000GW going spare annually. It doesn't actually work like that, demand is spiky and so is generation - gas powered generators turn up/off/down to meet demand, and there is some waste in that process, and we use that spare for pumping water into reservoirs that act as batteries.
To charge your electric car you need to plug it in, and use around 60KW generation capacity, 21KW at a domestic plug, 7 hour charge.
Sounds OK, but this is additional usage to the average 4,500KW the average household uses annually. Recharge every 3 days, and you've increased your usage by 55%.
Finally, our generation capacity is reducing, and consumption is increasing.
Bottom line, we don't have the power generating capacity or distribution ability to support electric cars in any any more that relatively small numbers - upto a million, maybe. 15 years is a realistic timescale for the start of popular uptake.
The figures are for cars only.
Currently, around 32,000,000 cars in the UK, averaging 14,000 km/year and consuming 7.6 litres/100 km.
An IC powered car converts around 30% of the input into useful energy (moving, heater, lights, etc.)
An electric car converts around 36% of power station output to usable energy (moving, lights, heating. Losses are grid transmission, transformers/rectification, batteries & motors)
The average car then has an energy input of 8,500 KW, assuming fuel contains 10KW/litre (Petrol is 9KW, Diesel 10.9KW, so 10 is near enough).
So an electric car for Mr. Average will require 6,800 KW.
If we swap 1% of cars from oil to electricity, 320,000 cars, that is an annual generation capacity of 2.176 GW.
The UK has around 80GW generating capacity, producing 400,000GW a year out of a theoretical 700,000GW if there were no power losses, plant breakdown, repair etc.
We actually use about 360,000GW which sound like 40,000GW going spare annually. It doesn't actually work like that, demand is spiky and so is generation - gas powered generators turn up/off/down to meet demand, and there is some waste in that process, and we use that spare for pumping water into reservoirs that act as batteries.
To charge your electric car you need to plug it in, and use around 60KW generation capacity, 21KW at a domestic plug, 7 hour charge.
Sounds OK, but this is additional usage to the average 4,500KW the average household uses annually. Recharge every 3 days, and you've increased your usage by 55%.
Finally, our generation capacity is reducing, and consumption is increasing.
Bottom line, we don't have the power generating capacity or distribution ability to support electric cars in any any more that relatively small numbers - upto a million, maybe. 15 years is a realistic timescale for the start of popular uptake.
kambites said:
The spiky nature of power consumption is precisely what makes them viable, or at least not quite so completely useless an idea. 90% of people will charge their cars at night when they are using almost no other electricity.
And thats the problem. Grid characteristics reversed. Huge new demand on a system that wasn't designed for it.Plus, of course Mr Brown has lost £800 for everyone that switches, or £256,000,000 for every 1% than goes from oil to electricity!
the danger of these new fuel vehicles is that they will only be accepted if they match or beat performance of todays cars, which frankly aint gonna happen.
the tesla is one of the very first decent attempts at a new kind of car and cannot be compared to the equivalent lotus. this is more like the model t ford, that didnt go too far or too fast but years later we have the focus RS.
well done to Tesla for taking such brave early steps.
I'm looking forward to this technology becoming good enough to be accepted.
the tesla is one of the very first decent attempts at a new kind of car and cannot be compared to the equivalent lotus. this is more like the model t ford, that didnt go too far or too fast but years later we have the focus RS.
well done to Tesla for taking such brave early steps.
I'm looking forward to this technology becoming good enough to be accepted.
I was watching a program on Discovery about how America's power grid is completely overworked. They're screwed now that everyone in California is going to buy one of these. Have fun completely overhauling your power grid!
If we build loads of nuclear power stations NOW then it could work in England. Eventually, batteries will last for thousands of miles, it's more or less inevitable. Internal combustion engines aren't a very efficient design with regards to energy transfer from chemical to kinetic energy.
Having said that, it will be beyond the lifetime of anyone here before it will not be possible to drive an internal combustion engined car. People still drive 40 year old cars as daily drivers anyway so in, say, 50 years time it isn't too big a stretch of the imagination to say that if you want to drive an internal combustion engined car just drive a classic!
If we build loads of nuclear power stations NOW then it could work in England. Eventually, batteries will last for thousands of miles, it's more or less inevitable. Internal combustion engines aren't a very efficient design with regards to energy transfer from chemical to kinetic energy.
Having said that, it will be beyond the lifetime of anyone here before it will not be possible to drive an internal combustion engined car. People still drive 40 year old cars as daily drivers anyway so in, say, 50 years time it isn't too big a stretch of the imagination to say that if you want to drive an internal combustion engined car just drive a classic!
There is already better solution in place with the hydrogen fuel cells so not real point in debating the merits of he Tesla, its not really a technological advancement to stick a load of laptop batteries in car, lets be honest about it. Bit of a cheek using his name considering the genius of the man.
Dagnut said:
There is already better solution in place with the hydrogen fuel cells so not real point in debating the merits of he Tesla, its not really a technological advancement to stick a load of laptop batteries in car, lets be honest about it. Bit of a cheek using his name considering the genius of the man.
Except:1) Hydrogen is significantly less efficient as an energy storage and distribution medium than batteries and the national grid.
2) You need significant quantities of platinum which is environmentally expensive to mine and there simply isn't enough of it for all of the world's transport need.
3) No-one has really managed to make a viable fuel cell powered car anyway.
And probably some more that I've forgotten.
odyssey2200 said:
kambites said:
3) No-one has really managed to make a viable fuel cell powered car anyway.
I would not call any of the currently available Electric cars "viable"Have you forgotten the Honda FXC?
Just for reference the Clarity is just a chevy Volt with a fuel cell instead of an IC range extender. Look at the implications that has on its cost....
odyssey2200 said:
kambites said:
3) No-one has really managed to make a viable fuel cell powered car anyway.
I would not call any of the currently available Electric cars "viable"Have you forgotten the Honda FXC?
kambites said:
odyssey2200 said:
kambites said:
3) No-one has really managed to make a viable fuel cell powered car anyway.
I would not call any of the currently available Electric cars "viable"Have you forgotten the Honda FXC?
kambites said:
Dagnut said:
There is already better solution in place with the hydrogen fuel cells so not real point in debating the merits of he Tesla, its not really a technological advancement to stick a load of laptop batteries in car, lets be honest about it. Bit of a cheek using his name considering the genius of the man.
Except:1) Hydrogen is significantly less efficient as an energy storage and distribution medium than batteries and the national grid.
2) You need significant quantities of platinum which is environmentally expensive to mine and there simply isn't enough of it for all of the world's transport need.
3) No-one has really managed to make a viable fuel cell powered car anyway.
And probably some more that I've forgotten.
2)Platinum is already being replaced,
http://www.hydrogen-motors.com/hydrogen/2009/10/da...
3) It's early stages again, your missing the point I was making but, my point is the only thing that Tesla have done is slapped a pile of laptop batteries together, they haven't done any significant development of the auto mobile, I don't see them as deserving of the praise they are getting.
I no I didn't watch James May and think "wow" that's amazing I have been following the FCX for a while..I think if the production of hydrogen can become a simpler and safer processes, its the way forward for the greenies(I personally don't subscribe to the theories of oil running out or see cars as a contributor to global warming)..just a humble opinion mind you..
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff