Electric - It shouldn't need my 12 year old to tell you..

[RizzoTheRat]

This is crowd sourced data from Model S owners, life seems to be pretty good

[gangzoom]

Mungo Terry said:

Regarding the youtube video posted about the tesla battery degradation, the chaps entire argument seems to be based on a linear extrapolation of currwent data. Have tesla genuinely created a different battery technology, or are they the same as all other li-ions and have a exponential degradation curve and the chap is being disingenuous?

No, Tesla is using the tried and tested tech found in your phone/laptop.

The difference is the cells in the Tesla are carefully managed, never allowed to go to 100% charge nor are the cells ever fully empty. They are also temperature controlled.

How long would an internal combustion last if you removed the rev limiter, coolant, and run it at full capacity all the time? This is essentially what happens with the battery in phones/laptops.

The battery in a Leaf isnt managed as closely and suffer much more degredation.

[InitialDave]

gangzoom said:

No, Tesla is using the tried and tested tech found in your phone/laptop.

Different battery chemistry, as already discussed in this thread.

[bearman68]

Max_Torque said:

bearman68 said:

EV in northern states seems to be higher then ICE, especially a frugal diesel.

Show your working please.....


(remember, the "real world" fuel economy is what matters, not what the car does over the official tests. And also remember, when it's cold, your ICE is horribly polluting (check out the emissions / CO2 from the Federal -7degC test for ref!)

Frugal diesels taxed at what? 100 Co2 per? EV possibly calculated at 300. Allow 100% error in either and both directions, and the figures still look comparable.
I don't have a dog in the fight here, just pointing out that here and now EV's are not the 100% answer to our pollution concerns, especially with regard to Co2.
To be honest, I can't be bothered to argue. while there is some supporting evidence for EV, much of it is not so positive - so the 'truth' is likely to depend on the exact circumstances.

[anonymous-user]

bearman68 said:

Max_Torque said:

bearman68 said:

EV in northern states seems to be higher then ICE, especially a frugal diesel.

Show your working please.....


(remember, the "real world" fuel economy is what matters, not what the car does over the official tests. And also remember, when it's cold, your ICE is horribly polluting (check out the emissions / CO2 from the Federal -7degC test for ref!)

Frugal diesels taxed at what? 100 Co2 per? EV possibly calculated at 300. Allow 100% error in either and both directions, and the figures still look comparable.
I don't have a dog in the fight here, just pointing out that here and now EV's are not the 100% answer to our pollution concerns, especially with regard to Co2.
To be honest, I can't be bothered to argue. while there is some supporting evidence for EV, much of it is not so positive - so the 'truth' is likely to depend on the exact circumstances.

what has Tax got to do with anything? If you measure the energy used by each vehicle, over typical realworld driving the EV uses around 4 times LESS energy. This is why it is greener!

[e30m3Mark]

Max_Torque said:

bearman68 said:

Max_Torque said:

bearman68 said:

EV in northern states seems to be higher then ICE, especially a frugal diesel.

Show your working please.....


(remember, the "real world" fuel economy is what matters, not what the car does over the official tests. And also remember, when it's cold, your ICE is horribly polluting (check out the emissions / CO2 from the Federal -7degC test for ref!)

Frugal diesels taxed at what? 100 Co2 per? EV possibly calculated at 300. Allow 100% error in either and both directions, and the figures still look comparable.
I don't have a dog in the fight here, just pointing out that here and now EV's are not the 100% answer to our pollution concerns, especially with regard to Co2.
To be honest, I can't be bothered to argue. while there is some supporting evidence for EV, much of it is not so positive - so the 'truth' is likely to depend on the exact circumstances.

what has Tax got to do with anything? If you measure the energy used by each vehicle, over typical realworld driving the EV uses around 4 times LESS energy. This is why it is greener!

Does it use more energy to manufacture? (just asking btw)

[AW111]

e30m3Mark said:

Does it use more energy to manufacture? (just asking btw)

I believe it's roughly comparable.
Think of all the precision machined bits in an ICE car's gearbox - there's a lot of processes going from ore to a gearbox, and every step takes energy.
Smelting aluminium is a big energy cost for any modern car : it's basically frozen electricity.

[bearman68]

Max_Torque said:

what has Tax got to do with anything? If you measure the energy used by each vehicle, over typical realworld driving the EV uses around 4 times LESS energy. This is why it is greener!

Not sure what 4 times less energy means? Does it mean 25%?
Those figures are not correct.

Clearly the amount of 'energy' required to drive a car is broadly similar, irrelevant of the chosen method of powering it. If you look at the Co2 produced to make that (mechanical) energy, the EV can be less, but is sometimes more. It depends on the generation source, and (for example) since many cars are charged at night, that in itself produces much more than if the car was charged off solar panels in the day.
And yes, a EV car does use more Co2 to make - about 40% by my quick squinting of the data.

[babatunde]

AW111 said:

e30m3Mark said:

Does it use more energy to manufacture? (just asking btw)

I believe it's roughly comparable.
Think of all the precision machined bits in an ICE car's gearbox - there's a lot of processes going from ore to a gearbox, and every step takes energy.
Smelting aluminium is a big energy cost for any modern car : it's basically frozen electricity.

No one has really published any statistics comparing the cost of building an EV verse a ICE one, let alone the energy costs.

Logically because EVs are currently produced in much smaller numbers, economy of scale is on the side of ICE cars as well as the sunk cost of infrastructure and skills built up in the industry.

Tesla (I know) seem to believe that car building can be done differently/better/cheaper hence Gigafactory.

[anonymous-user]

bearman68 said:

Not sure what 4 times less energy means? Does it mean 25%?
Those figures are not correct.

Clearly the amount of 'energy' required to drive a car is broadly similar, irrelevant of the chosen method of powering it.

NOPE.


EV's. due to their packaging benefits (for example, no exhaust system, or massive draggy radiators) can have a lower drag, meaning a lower road load.

EV's have bi-directional powertrains, meaning they can recover energy from their KE. So in the real world, where our cars are constantly accelerating and braking, they use a LOT less energy

EV's don't get much less efficient at temperature extremes. An ICE, doing a 5degC cold start is hugely pollution, both in terms of extra frictional losses, and in terms of increased pollutant emissions.

[Evanivitch]

Just when I thought we were lacking an active EV-bashing thread this one comes along and saves the day.

[e30m3Mark]

Is it bashing EV's then, as that's not how I read it.

[Heres Johnny]

Max_Torque said:

NOPE.


EV's. due to their packaging benefits (for example, no exhaust system, or massive draggy radiators) can have a lower drag, meaning a lower road load.

EV's have bi-directional powertrains, meaning they can recover energy from their KE. So in the real world, where our cars are constantly accelerating and braking, they use a LOT less energy

EV's don't get much less efficient at temperature extremes. An ICE, doing a 5degC cold start is hugely pollution, both in terms of extra frictional losses, and in terms of increased pollutant emissions.

You were right up to the temperature point. EVs suffer massively due to the cold

[bearman68]

Heres Johnny said:

Max_Torque said:

NOPE.


EV's. due to their packaging benefits (for example, no exhaust system, or massive draggy radiators) can have a lower drag, meaning a lower road load.

EV's have bi-directional powertrains, meaning they can recover energy from their KE. So in the real world, where our cars are constantly accelerating and braking, they use a LOT less energy

EV's don't get much less efficient at temperature extremes. An ICE, doing a 5degC cold start is hugely pollution, both in terms of extra frictional losses, and in terms of increased pollutant emissions.

You were right up to the temperature point. EVs suffer massively due to the cold

......Oh, and the drag co-efficient.

Audi A6: 2011-present (Cd 0.26) ...
BMW i8: 2014 (Cd 0.26) ...
Mazda3 Sedan: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Mercedes-Benz B-Class: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Nissan GT-R, 2011–present (Cd 0.26) ...
Peugeot 508, 2011–present (Cd 0.25) ...
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, 2013-present (Cd 0.25) ...
Toyota Prius, 2010-present (Cd 0.25)

No EV's in there. Chevy Bolt is 0.31 give or take.

[Zoon]

bearman68 said:

......Oh, and the drag co-efficient.

Audi A6: 2011-present (Cd 0.26) ...
BMW i8: 2014 (Cd 0.26) ...
Mazda3 Sedan: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Mercedes-Benz B-Class: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Nissan GT-R, 2011–present (Cd 0.26) ...
Peugeot 508, 2011–present (Cd 0.25) ...
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, 2013-present (Cd 0.25) ...
Toyota Prius, 2010-present (Cd 0.25)

No EV's in there. Chevy Bolt is 0.31 give or take.

New Leaf is 0.29

[Evanivitch]

Hyundai Ioniq 0.24

[Heres Johnny]

bearman68 said:

......Oh, and the drag co-efficient.

Audi A6: 2011-present (Cd 0.26) ...
BMW i8: 2014 (Cd 0.26) ...
Mazda3 Sedan: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Mercedes-Benz B-Class: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Nissan GT-R, 2011–present (Cd 0.26) ...
Peugeot 508, 2011–present (Cd 0.25) ...
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, 2013-present (Cd 0.25) ...
Toyota Prius, 2010-present (Cd 0.25)

No EV's in there. Chevy Bolt is 0.31 give or take.

Tesla model S is 0.24

[bearman68]

So EV's offer no aerodynamic performance improvement over a conventional car then?

Y'know if we are going to all change to EV's at least understand the issues and benefits, because if we are going to base many years of infrastructure and development on EV, we have a duty to make sure we think through all the permutations.


Benefits so far......
Lower tailpipe pollution.
Some small Co2 benefit.

[anonymous-user]

bearman68 said:

Heres Johnny said:

Max_Torque said:

NOPE.


EV's. due to their packaging benefits (for example, no exhaust system, or massive draggy radiators) can have a lower drag, meaning a lower road load.

EV's have bi-directional powertrains, meaning they can recover energy from their KE. So in the real world, where our cars are constantly accelerating and braking, they use a LOT less energy

EV's don't get much less efficient at temperature extremes. An ICE, doing a 5degC cold start is hugely pollution, both in terms of extra frictional losses, and in terms of increased pollutant emissions.

You were right up to the temperature point. EVs suffer massively due to the cold

......Oh, and the drag co-efficient.

Audi A6: 2011-present (Cd 0.26) ...
BMW i8: 2014 (Cd 0.26) ...
Mazda3 Sedan: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Mercedes-Benz B-Class: 2012-present (Cd 0.26) ...
Nissan GT-R, 2011–present (Cd 0.26) ...
Peugeot 508, 2011–present (Cd 0.25) ...
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, 2013-present (Cd 0.25) ...
Toyota Prius, 2010-present (Cd 0.25)

No EV's in there. Chevy Bolt is 0.31 give or take.

you need to compare CdA, not Cd............

[anonymous-user]

Heres Johnny said:

Max_Torque said:

NOPE.


EV's. due to their packaging benefits (for example, no exhaust system, or massive draggy radiators) can have a lower drag, meaning a lower road load.

EV's have bi-directional powertrains, meaning they can recover energy from their KE. So in the real world, where our cars are constantly accelerating and braking, they use a LOT less energy

EV's don't get much less efficient at temperature extremes. An ICE, doing a 5degC cold start is hugely pollution, both in terms of extra frictional losses, and in terms of increased pollutant emissions.

You were right up to the temperature point. EVs suffer massively due to the cold

Ok, explain to me the physics behind that statement. ("EVs suffer massively due to the cold")

You may need to make reference to the resistance of conductors vs their temperature, the effect of cold temperatures on electron mobility in chemical storage elements, and calculations of sliding friction, oil film shear strength and other parasitic losses for ICEs.


What you'll actually find is that EVs get more efficient, ie use less energy for a given driving distance, as they get cold because most conductors have a positive temperature co-efficient of resistance, but their maximum range is reduced due to a reduction of charge carrier mobility in their energy storage system. However RANGE != CONSUMPTION

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 27th September 19:53