RE: Final EU vote on 2035 engine phaseout delayed
Discussion
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
.
In exactly the same way that the battery was ‘instantaneously’ discharged to accelerate the car in the first place.Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
.
I’ve already explained in 3 times.
The kinetic energy carried by the car is about 1% or less of the battery’s total capacity.
The power rating at which you can discharge or recharge a modern EV battery for 1% of its capacity is very high.
The instantaneous power rating REQUIRED to accelerate or decelerate a car at the same rate depends on the speed.
To calculate the instantaneous power for either acceleration or deceleration use the following equation:
6 bhp per metric ton per mph per G.
Try it, see what power ratings you come up with for various G ratings, road speeds and vehicle kerb masses.
1 G of acceleration or deceleration is a change in speed of 22 mph per second.
Very few people brake at 1G, just as very few people accelerate at 1G.
Mostly, the braking is far more gentle, just like the acceleration.
bigothunter said:
Well that was revealing...
I'm not a denier but I am open minded. I question what I'm being told as 'fact' rather than accept it without consideration. Seems sensible to me...
To successfully question the widely accepted view on climate change, it would be necessary to read the key papers, understand the papers, consider the evidence and then ask questions. Perhaps about the data, analysis, confounding factors. That would be the approach that the scientific machine would recognise, respect and respond to.I'm not a denier but I am open minded. I question what I'm being told as 'fact' rather than accept it without consideration. Seems sensible to me...
The problem is that many who say they question the view have not done this. Are they "questioning" or are they disagreeing? In general they are disagreeing (but from a position of ignorance) They simply want to believe otherwise and align to an opposing minority, with their theories (which they have not read, understood nor questioned) as "evidence"
It is difficult for someone who is not an expert in the field. They can only have an uniformed opinion.
I would count myself to be in this category. So on what basis could I argue that the 97% climate scientists are wrong.
otolith said:
Strangely Brown said:
It's all getting more than a bit EVangelistic.
Don’t worry, once you’re past the denial and anger, it gradually gets better. Especially when you realise that you’re probably going to be able to keep driving ICEs for fun as long as you want to, there just won’t be millions of boring white goods ICEs being manufactured. Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Monday 27th March 10:08
otolith said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
Have you considered reappraising your beliefs about battery technology in the face of the fact that there are millions of cars on the road demonstrably doing exactly what you believe isn't possible?Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
911hope said:
To successfully question the widely accepted view on climate change, it would be necessary to read the key papers, understand the papers, consider the evidence and then ask questions. Perhaps about the data, analysis, confounding factors. That would be the approach that the scientific machine would recognise, respect and respond to.
The problem is that many who say they question the view have not done this. Are they "questioning" or are they disagreeing? In general they are disagreeing (but from a position of ignorance) They simply want to believe otherwise and align to an opposing minority, with their theories (which they have not read, understood nor questioned) as "evidence"
It is difficult for someone who is not an expert in the field. They can only have an uniformed opinion.
I would count myself to be in this category. So on what basis could I argue that the 97% climate scientists are wrong.
97% The problem is that many who say they question the view have not done this. Are they "questioning" or are they disagreeing? In general they are disagreeing (but from a position of ignorance) They simply want to believe otherwise and align to an opposing minority, with their theories (which they have not read, understood nor questioned) as "evidence"
It is difficult for someone who is not an expert in the field. They can only have an uniformed opinion.
I would count myself to be in this category. So on what basis could I argue that the 97% climate scientists are wrong.
911hope said:
So on what basis could I argue that the 97% climate scientists are wrong.
Nobody is saying that 97% of climate scientists are wrong. They are saying that the claim that 97% of scientists agree with the narrative is wrong.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LVSrTZDopM
From 1:17:45
Edited by Strangely Brown on Monday 27th March 10:09
Pan Pan Pan said:
This is the hilarious bit. EV zealots have jumped on the first EV bandwagon tha came along, and are desperate to try to convince every one else, to do the same, so that they dont get left holding the Betamax version of a car.
Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Are you suggesting AC batteries?Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
911hope said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
This is the hilarious bit. EV zealots have jumped on the first EV bandwagon tha came along, and are desperate to try to convince every one else, to do the same, so that they dont get left holding the Betamax version of a car.
Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Are you suggesting AC batteries?Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
Your argument is a bit flawed.Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
I think you will find the energy from regeneration is significantly less than the ability of the batteries to accept said charge so there is not a situation where too much charge is forced into the batteries. There are some fairly technical articles if you wish to digest have a good grounding in Physiscs.
Interestingly Regen is used in adaptive cruise control and obviously in hybrids and running car's basic electrical systems all to reduce overall energy consumption.
Did you know the average ruminant produces 250-500 litres of methane a day. Globally, livestock are responsible for burping (and a small amount from farting) the methane equivalent of 3.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually. Which is also a pretty meaningless piece of information in isolation.
bigothunter said:
otolith said:
The point is that it doesn't matter whether you are "open minded" or not. You can argue all you like about the climate, it's the political reality that matters.
So the EV juggernaut is driven by politics not science. We can agree on that 'fact'.Pan Pan Pan said:
Doing WHAT? regenerative braking will put a small amount of power back into a battery, but no battery in existence can be instantaneously recharged. So why dont `you' tell us how a battery can be instantaneously recharged by regenerative braking.
What in your expert opinion is the maximum current charge current for an EV battery? For what period of time?What is the the current achieved with regenerative braking? For what period of time?
You may want to consider the real life profile of braking in normal use. i.e. how often, how hard, from what speed, for what duration?
Please reference the evidence and then show calculations on the recharging efficiency of the process.
Waiting with baited breath......
Pan Pan Pan said:
Doing WHAT? regenerative braking will put a small amount of power back into a battery, but no battery in existence can be instantaneously recharged. So why dont `you' tell us how a battery can be instantaneously recharged by regenerative braking.
I suggest you do some proper research on how regen works and the ability of the motor to become a generator and understand the losses through that process.I even recently found that regen cannot be used to replace braking completely as the amount of energy required to slow a vehicle from high speed, say 100kph, is significantly larger than the motor/generator capacity.
GT9 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
.
In exactly the same way that the battery was ‘instantaneously’ discharged to accelerate the car in the first place.Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
.
I’ve already explained in 3 times.
The kinetic energy carried by the car is about 1% or less of the battery’s total capacity.
The power rating at which you can discharge or recharge a modern EV battery for 1% of its capacity is very high.
The instantaneous power rating REQUIRED to accelerate or decelerate a car at the same rate depends on the speed.
To calculate the instantaneous power for either acceleration or deceleration use the following equation:
6 bhp per metric ton per mph per G.
Try it, see what power ratings you come up with for various G ratings, road speeds and vehicle kerb masses.
1 G of acceleration or deceleration is a change in speed of 22 mph per second.
Very few people brake at 1G, just as very few people accelerate at 1G.
Mostly, the braking is far more gentle, just like the acceleration.
911hope said:
What in your expert opinion is the maximum current charge current for an EV battery? For what period of time?
What is the the current achieved with regenerative braking? For what period of time?
You may want to consider the real life profile of braking in normal use. i.e. how often, how hard, from what speed, for what duration?
Please reference the evidence and then show calculations on the recharging efficiency of the process.
Waiting with baited breath......
I thought it was pretty obvious that most vehicles are under 300kw so regen will always be less than this when losses are included. What is the the current achieved with regenerative braking? For what period of time?
You may want to consider the real life profile of braking in normal use. i.e. how often, how hard, from what speed, for what duration?
Please reference the evidence and then show calculations on the recharging efficiency of the process.
Waiting with baited breath......
Pan Pan Pan said:
And yet extant EVs are still around a thousand pounds heavier than and equivalent ICE vehicle. Dont forget that. All that extra weight takes extra energy to move it, or are you claiming that because a vehicle is an EV, all that extra weight doesn't count?
What relevance is that to your argument about EV regeneration? This is a completely different point and has been done to death in terms of comparison with ICE efficiency.It seems you wish to ignore the actual physics in lieu of prejudice.
Nomme de Plum said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
Your argument is a bit flawed.Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
I think you will find the energy from regeneration is significantly less than the ability of the batteries to accept said charge so there is not a situation where too much charge is forced into the batteries. There are some fairly technical articles if you wish to digest have a good grounding in Physiscs.
Interestingly Regen is used in adaptive cruise control and obviously in hybrids and running car's basic electrical systems all to reduce overall energy consumption.
Did you know the average ruminant produces 250-500 litres of methane a day. Globally, livestock are responsible for burping (and a small amount from farting) the methane equivalent of 3.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually. Which is also a pretty meaningless piece of information in isolation.
Just like Tesla on his own got it right, and Edison and his DC accolytes got it wrong. AC was the way the world went. Looks like quite a few could be making the same mistakes again.
Pan Pan Pan said:
911hope said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
This is the hilarious bit. EV zealots have jumped on the first EV bandwagon tha came along, and are desperate to try to convince every one else, to do the same, so that they dont get left holding the Betamax version of a car.
Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Are you suggesting AC batteries?Electric motors may well be the main form of traction for vehicles to go, but DC batteries? that particular question is a long, long way out for discussion. Especially when new much cheaper lighter forms of batteries appear to be being discovered.
Then there is Germany and other countries who are trying to go down the route of E fuels for cars, rather than relying solely on heavy battery EVs.
Those who rushed out and bought a heavy expensive EV now, might look a bit foolish if/when this happens.
Not unlike when Thomas Edison tried to convince everyone that DC was the way the world should go. Then along came Nicola Tesla, who was one person on his own, who believed that AC was the way to go. They made fun of him, and tried to denigrate him for his view, but guess who was proven right in the end? Clue! it wasn't Thomas Edison's DC. Wonder how the EV zealots will feel about their Betamax EVs then?
As a friend once said, learning from mistakes is only good, when you do it from `other' people's mistakes.
Pan Pan Pan said:
And yet extant EVs are still around a thousand pounds heavier than and equivalent ICE vehicle. Dont forget that. All that extra weight takes extra energy to move it, or are you claiming that because a vehicle is an EV, all that extra weight doesn't count?
For crying out loud, I've said previously that the extra mass of the EV is more than compensated for by the ability to recover up to 75% of the kinetic energy.From a vehicle dynamics perspective, the extra mass is positioned low and central in the car, whilst at the same time removing a large and high up concentrated mass at the front (the engine). This results in excellent dynamic behaviour for a car that weighs so much.
Yes, the mass is there. We all know that.
Modern engineering has more than compensated for it. END OF.
Now please fixate on something else because the 'weight thing' is so last year and makes you look like you simply have no idea what you are talking about.
Pan Pan Pan said:
otolith said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Please explain how batteries, which everyone knows take time to recharge, can be `instantaneously' recharged by regenerative braking.
Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
Have you considered reappraising your beliefs about battery technology in the face of the fact that there are millions of cars on the road demonstrably doing exactly what you believe isn't possible?Do you know what happens when you try to put too much power into a battery in too short a period of time? the regenerative braking system may be excellent at producing electrical energy `instantaneously' but it still cannot put all that energy back into a battery `instantaneously'. Unless of course you know that such a battery exists. If it does please, tell us all, how it is able to be recharged `instantaneously'.
And by the way, 300 tons of material must be mined to create the materials to form one Tesla battery.
Nomme de Plum said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
And yet extant EVs are still around a thousand pounds heavier than and equivalent ICE vehicle. Dont forget that. All that extra weight takes extra energy to move it, or are you claiming that because a vehicle is an EV, all that extra weight doesn't count?
What relevance is that to your argument about EV regeneration? This is a completely different point and has been done to death in terms of comparison with ICE efficiency.It seems you wish to ignore the actual physics in lieu of prejudice.
You really must open your eyes, and broaden your outlook. Like Tesla discovered DC batteries may not be the best way to go.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff