RE: Tesla: Charging Anxiety Is 'For The Weak'

[leon9191]

I have just read on the Tesla web page that two guys in OZ have done 313miles on a single charge in a "green road rally", totally inderpendant of tesla and verified by race officals.

Thats pretty good going I would say.

[chickensoup]

probably at 40 mph

I think the 240 mile range is in ideal conditions. Wonder if they ran on one battery pack, or were able to swap? 200 miles then a charge would be pretty tedious

[AndrewW-G]

From the map on one of the pics, it looks like they made 19 stops over 3600 miles, so a little more than double the amount expected from a petrol car and no doubt for a lot longer than the 10 mins it takes to fill a car up.

I think its a good idea I agree with Jay Leno, more economical cars for mundane trips = more petrol for fun cars

[corradoboy1983]

sanctum said:

This would be more interesting if they gave more details, such as simple power consumption plots during the route overlaid on a routemap so we could see where the car was most efficient and where it guzzled.
Would also be nice, but less likely to get a timeline too, so we can see how long it took to cover that distance and how long it spent plugged in and out of action.
Some figures I dredged up off wikipedia, for interest only, not debate:
244 mile range - so minimum 14 recharges after the initial.
3.5hrs recharge time using a 70amp! hose.
So it was isdle for 3.5*14=49hrs
If the trip averaged 30mph, that's over a quater of the travel time spent immobile.
On a more practicle point, 70amp charging hose! on a 13amp household system in the Uk that would equate to a 19hr charge time.

Ahh yes, but that's at 110volts. So ours would be more like 35Ams if my maths is correct? So actually around half that time - still long, but not excessive for an overnight charge...

[ctallchris]

KMT said:

Can anyone answer me this? - the amount of use I get from a new mobile phone battery goes well off the boil after some reasonable use (say 6 months) - am I safe to assume the same for electric cars? If so aren't these stats/calculations a little "idealistic" given that an average car age is measured in years nowadays?

if you have an old mobile it may have a nickel based battery (it should say on it somewhere). lithium ion batteries are generally better my current laptop has lost about 5% of it's life in the last 4 years and i've not been too kind on it. A cheap battery will fail more expensive batteries

http://www.energybulletin.net/image/uploads/33714/...

example of a capacity / cycle diagram which is how this is tested. if the tesla was using these batteries at 1400 charge cycles (for the tesla ~220 miles that would hit 300,000 miles when it would have 80% of it's range.

[skint_driver]

A chap over on SELOC had the ecurie25 Tesla out for a spin in the snow. It _really_ does not get on with cold weather - expect about half of the stated max range on a full charge because:
- you'll have the heater on
- lights+wipers too
- batteries are far less efficient in cold weather.

Having said that, I love the Tesla and it does make economic sense if you:
- commute less than 100 miles most days, or less than 150 miles and can charge at work
- live in a place with a warm climate
- would otherwise spend £50K on a sports coupe. Lower tax, maintenance and fuel bills make it worth the extra up-front costs.
- Have access to another car for touring or long trips

With better battery tech, we will see the range figures improve. With greater adoption, we'll see charging stations in car parks and workplaces. I hear Renault are planning a range of 7 EVs for the near future, where the battery packs will be standardised and leased - this is very smart. This will lower the purchase price and remove anxiety about battery performance from the purchase decision. Standardised packs that can be quickly swapped and stored might make fast 'refuelling' possible, and battery rental will roughly equal fuel costs of an IC car.

Edited by skint_driver on Monday 11th January 15:27

[leon9191]

skint_driver said:

.....and battery rental will roughly equal fuel costs of an IC car.

Edited by skint_driver on Monday 11th January 15:27

Surely the point of these should be that they are cheaper to run than IC cars? Fair enough that the purchase price will be higher to begin with but people should then be rewarded with lower running cost if they are doing the “green” thing or why would you bother?

[Kazlet]

corradoboy1983 said:

sanctum said:

This would be more interesting if they gave more details, such as simple power consumption plots during the route overlaid on a routemap so we could see where the car was most efficient and where it guzzled.
Would also be nice, but less likely to get a timeline too, so we can see how long it took to cover that distance and how long it spent plugged in and out of action.
Some figures I dredged up off wikipedia, for interest only, not debate:
244 mile range - so minimum 14 recharges after the initial.
3.5hrs recharge time using a 70amp! hose.
So it was isdle for 3.5*14=49hrs
If the trip averaged 30mph, that's over a quater of the travel time spent immobile.
On a more practicle point, 70amp charging hose! on a 13amp household system in the Uk that would equate to a 19hr charge time.

Ahh yes, but that's at 110volts. So ours would be more like 35Ams if my maths is correct? So actually around half that time - still long, but not excessive for an overnight charge...

No the the 3.5hrs recharge at 70 amps is at 240v or 19hrs at 13amps.

Now try working it out at 110v.

Edited by Kazlet on Monday 11th January 15:55

[dandarez]

All this about it making economic sense...

Forget the stupidly high price, wait till residuals come into the equation!

I could shift my normally aspirated car tomorrow for a good price. If I had a Tesla how long would I have to wait to find a buyer, and more importantly how much would I lose!

[skint_driver]

leon9191 said:

skint_driver said:

.....and battery rental will roughly equal fuel costs of an IC car.

Edited by skint_driver on Monday 11th January 15:27

Surely the point of these should be that they are cheaper to run than IC cars? Fair enough that the purchase price will be higher to begin with but people should then be rewarded with lower running cost if they are doing the “green” thing or why would you bother?

Time will tell how things compare, and whether 'roughly equal' will mean 'a bit cheaper'. Without the batteries the up-front cost of an EV should be cheaper than the IC equivalent - it certainly has far fewer moving parts. I guess it would be down to personal preference whether you rent your battery or buy it with the car (with or without finance).

[Hedgerley]

Tesla ran a full blog on the trip - this page details the route and stops, together with daily mileage. It was also a promotional trip of course, so perhaps not an ideal nor the quickest route.

http://www.teslamotors.com/roadtrip/the-route/

Its a warts and all story which discusses variable charging times, reduced range in cold weather etc, plus references to all day 65mph cruises. The daily references detail mileage, power consumed, range left etc. Good for them being honest.

Edited by Hedgerley on Monday 11th January 16:15

[skint_driver]

dandarez said:

I could shift my normally aspirated car tomorrow for a good price. If I had a Tesla how long would I have to wait to find a buyer, and more importantly how much would I lose!

Going the IC route:
- Buy a car for 70k
- Over 3 years, pay the tax, fuel, and maintenance.
- Sell for £35k

Tesla:
- Buy for £100K
- Over 3 years, pay minimal running costs
- Probably sell for more than £30K, yes?

Edited by skint_driver on Monday 11th January 16:06

[jazzyjeff]

Marf said:

snotrag][cynic said:

I'd be interested to see some calculations based on the charging current as seen, the total charging time, total kWh used during the trip. Also the cost in terms of kWh used and then the relevant C02/emissions/"Carbon hoofprint" calculations based on those figures.

[/cynic]

ETA - I'm actually not one of the people completely against electric cars, nor am I one who flatly refuses to listen to anything regarding MMGW etc. I dont necceasarily believe it, but i'm happy to hear to both sides of the coin.

Happy to be corrected(my understanding of the mathmatics is probably quite simplistic) but from doing some googling I've found the following

http://enochthered.wordpress.com/category/electric...

"The battery in the Tesla takes 3.5 hours to charge from zero charge, and stores 53 kWh of energy. Efficiency of the charging electronics is 86%, so 62 kWh of electricity is needed for a single charge."

"In February 2008, Tesla Motors reported that, after testing a Validation Prototype of the Tesla Roadster at an EPA-certified location, that those tests yielded a range of 220 miles (354 km) and a plug-to-wheel efficiency of 199 Wh/km"

http://www.swivel.com/workbooks/18161-Carbon-effic...

According to this producing 1kWh of electricity emits 0.346kg of CO2 if generated from coal.

So 62kwh x 0.346Kg CO2 = 21.452Kg CO2 per 220miles.

According to this, my MR2 Turbo would put out 5.51tonnes of CO2 doing 10,000 miles a year averaging 26mpg

http://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

So the Tesla over the same mileage would put out 975kg of CO2.

Surprised it was that much lower to be honest.

Interesting calculations.

I presume those for your MR2 included the CO2 impact not just at the exhaust, but of all the stages in getting the petrol into your car, i.e.

- the power used to extract and refine the oil into petrol;
- the tankers, trains and lorries used to transport the petrol to the forecourt;
- the power used in pumping the petrol from the forecourt tank up to the filler neck?



JJ

[Marf]

I couldnt say whether it does or not, I just used the calculator provided on that link.

Ditto the DEFRA figures on kgCO2 per kWh, I don't know if that is purely the burning of the coal, or the entire footprint required to extract, process and deliver the coal to a powerstation.

[Daniel1]

jazzyjeff said:

Marf said:

snotrag][cynic said:

I'd be interested to see some calculations based on the charging current as seen, the total charging time, total kWh used during the trip. Also the cost in terms of kWh used and then the relevant C02/emissions/"Carbon hoofprint" calculations based on those figures.

[/cynic]

ETA - I'm actually not one of the people completely against electric cars, nor am I one who flatly refuses to listen to anything regarding MMGW etc. I dont necceasarily believe it, but i'm happy to hear to both sides of the coin.

Happy to be corrected(my understanding of the mathmatics is probably quite simplistic) but from doing some googling I've found the following

http://enochthered.wordpress.com/category/electric...

"The battery in the Tesla takes 3.5 hours to charge from zero charge, and stores 53 kWh of energy. Efficiency of the charging electronics is 86%, so 62 kWh of electricity is needed for a single charge."

"In February 2008, Tesla Motors reported that, after testing a Validation Prototype of the Tesla Roadster at an EPA-certified location, that those tests yielded a range of 220 miles (354 km) and a plug-to-wheel efficiency of 199 Wh/km"

http://www.swivel.com/workbooks/18161-Carbon-effic...

According to this producing 1kWh of electricity emits 0.346kg of CO2 if generated from coal.

So 62kwh x 0.346Kg CO2 = 21.452Kg CO2 per 220miles.

According to this, my MR2 Turbo would put out 5.51tonnes of CO2 doing 10,000 miles a year averaging 26mpg

http://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

So the Tesla over the same mileage would put out 975kg of CO2.

Surprised it was that much lower to be honest.

Interesting calculations.

I presume those for your MR2 included the CO2 impact not just at the exhaust, but of all the stages in getting the petrol into your car, i.e.

- the power used to extract and refine the oil into petrol;
- the tankers, trains and lorries used to transport the petrol to the forecourt;
- the power used in pumping the petrol from the forecourt tank up to the filler neck?



JJ

yeah but how far do you want to go with this? Mining the raw materials for both cars, all of the production of the cars, the coal (+infrastructure) and the petrol (+infrastructure)

That sounds like a government job with billions to spend to figure that out.

[sanctum]

Now if we had any hard evidence that atmospheric CO2 increase causes Global temperature rise I'd be much more interested in the "what's my carbon footprint" thing. But as we only have evidence (and strong evidence at that) to show that global temperature rise causes atmospheric CO2 increase, then I'll pass on the whole debate.

What is good news is that the Tesla equates to a 120mpg supercar with 0-60 times of around 3.7 seconds. That's something to talk about.
The advance of battery technology for vehicles is also great news. It takes mass market products to drive productionisation of new technologies such as the fast charging battery cells and alternatives to Li-ion such as Li-iron, which hold a greater % of their charge over their life.

The electric vehicle market is a very interesting phenomenon, but not because of the vehicles, because of the technological advances it is bringing to all areas.

[pacman1]

sanctum said:

Now if we had any hard evidence that atmospheric CO2 increase causes Global temperature rise I'd be much more interested in the "what's my carbon footprint" thing. But as we only have evidence (and strong evidence at that) to show that global temperature rise causes atmospheric CO2 increase, then I'll pass on the whole debate.

What is good news is that the Tesla equates to a 120mpg supercar with 0-60 times of around 3.7 seconds. That's something to talk about.
The advance of battery technology for vehicles is also great news. It takes mass market products to drive productionisation of new technologies such as the fast charging battery cells and alternatives to Li-ion such as Li-iron, which hold a greater % of their charge over their life.

The electric vehicle market is a very interesting phenomenon, but not because of the vehicles, because of the technological advances it is bringing to all areas.

Nothing wrong with old, tried and tested technology. If I ever get an electric car, I'll be mounting a playing card with a clothes peg by the wheel spokes so padestrians can hear me coming.

[cazzer]

Everyone ignore the issue of where the hell yer gonna plug one of these things in to charge it.
Great if you have a garage.
But if you dont?

There are a lot of terraced houses round here? Are we talkin running a 4 gang out of yer living room window?

What if you live on the 15th floor of a block of flats?

Even more pertinant, a lot of new housing estates have been built with no parkin provision (to try and get people to use public transport). So these people, if they have a car, can't park it anywhere near their house.

[NoelWatson]

ctallchris said:

It's much quicker at the legal side of 60 than most cars (3.7s is comparable to the claimed 0-60 time of a ferrari F50)

But that is a claimed number for the Tesla

5 secs according to Autocar

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsData/...

Edited by NoelWatson on Monday 11th January 16:49

[Daniel1]

sanctum said:

Now if we had any hard evidence that atmospheric CO2 increase causes Global temperature rise I'd be much more interested in the "what's my carbon footprint" thing. But as we only have evidence (and strong evidence at that) to show that global temperature rise causes atmospheric CO2 increase, then I'll pass on the whole debate.

What is good news is that the Tesla equates to a 120mpg supercar with 0-60 times of around 3.7 seconds. That's something to talk about.
The advance of battery technology for vehicles is also great news. It takes mass market products to drive productionisation of new technologies such as the fast charging battery cells and alternatives to Li-ion such as Li-iron, which hold a greater % of their charge over their life.

The electric vehicle market is a very interesting phenomenon, but not because of the vehicles, because of the technological advances it is bringing to all areas.

what does that mean?

ETA

I know what youre getting at. Its a sort of 'discover things along the way' sort of attitude. That perticuler thought doesnt bother me except there are plenty of other industries that can spend the time looking into battery power. All we'll learn along the way is that they are not suitable for cars. Spending money on hydrogen and its subsiduries would be better places for the car industry to spend its R&D money imo, although im only a regular punter and not anybody qualified.

Edited by Daniel1 on Monday 11th January 16:53