Electric - It shouldn't need my 12 year old to tell you..
Discussion
OldDuffer said:
Stuff
Allow me to help make your point...- Batteries are heavy, arguably twice as heavy as they need to be. this means stopping ability needs to be greater and in the event of a non-break application, a crash has more kinetic energy to disperse.
- In the event of a crash, batteries like to get a bit explode. (That said, so do all other technologies, really.)
- Batteries degrade, and they cost a lot in both monetary terms and environmental terms. And let's not kid ourselves, it's more degradation than an ICE per mile. And an ICE can be fixed back to original spec for a lot less money and environmental impact.
- Charging is currently an inconvenience unless you start and stop your journey at a place of charging. Fast charging is at the cost of battery longevity.
Environment - Electric is really no better for the environment long term. It just moves the point of pollution.
Infrastructure - if everyone switched to electric over night we couldn't support it. If everyone switched over the next 10-15 years... we probably couldn't support it without having everything as a smart device. (Your fridge turns its self off for a bit when there is high demand for electricity to help smooth out the grid)
All in, I see the point OP is trying to make. it really is a marketing gimmick by the government. but what other alternatives are there? If we keep drilling for oil it will eventually run out. Electricity can be made by wind, solar and nuclear. The bigger joke is making the wind turbines and solar panels also consume a lot of resources.
What gets me is that over their own experiences of this technology, and come on, few can have escaped car batteries? Even less could have escaped diminishing run-times with their phones. You need no more background to be conversant with cell technology as it stands today.
Some smoke and mirrors in combination with flashy faux-tech and they buy it. They refuse to see any parallel, even when pointed out. Somehow in an EV, a battery gets better. With little exception, all have me as the halfwit here.
Yes, I’m the halfwit? I’m the troll?
I did wonder how the EV thing is gaining such a pace. I saw in a motorway service station a Tesla on charge, its owner let it run thru’ a 5 minute lighting sequence having it looking more festive than any Xmas tree. I’m not sure why a car should do this, but this started to answer my question. I had it that others could see a reality. Clearly not.
Enough shizzle on it and it's sold.
By a political will, we’re going into a technological blind-alley.
The battery HAS been re-invented.
You do wonder how they ever remember to breathe?
Get this? I humoured him, but one post even asked me where I go for my information? It leads you to question, why do we ever bother educating these people?
I gotta say though, Mr. Mush is brilliant, if not for the reasons his disciples would see. The 5 min lighting trick clearly sells cars. Love the bloke.
Some smoke and mirrors in combination with flashy faux-tech and they buy it. They refuse to see any parallel, even when pointed out. Somehow in an EV, a battery gets better. With little exception, all have me as the halfwit here.
Yes, I’m the halfwit? I’m the troll?
I did wonder how the EV thing is gaining such a pace. I saw in a motorway service station a Tesla on charge, its owner let it run thru’ a 5 minute lighting sequence having it looking more festive than any Xmas tree. I’m not sure why a car should do this, but this started to answer my question. I had it that others could see a reality. Clearly not.
Enough shizzle on it and it's sold.
By a political will, we’re going into a technological blind-alley.
The battery HAS been re-invented.
You do wonder how they ever remember to breathe?
Get this? I humoured him, but one post even asked me where I go for my information? It leads you to question, why do we ever bother educating these people?
I gotta say though, Mr. Mush is brilliant, if not for the reasons his disciples would see. The 5 min lighting trick clearly sells cars. Love the bloke.
Edited by OldDuffer on Friday 15th September 12:30
OldDuffer said:
. Save for some improved chemistry they haven't truly improved for 85 years. The efficiency is still abysmal.
Using your mobile phone example.1994: Motorola MicroTAC Elite The user could talk for 45 minutes from a fully charged battery.
2014 - Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) talk time 14:45h
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
I say the rant is from you rather than your 12 year old.
EV's are not the permanent fix but they are certainly better than what we are using now for a fair few of us...
i'm saving £700 odd a month - car will pay for itself in 3.8 years purely on the commute alone then even if i get £5k for it when i sell it it has worked out pretty darn good
OldDuffer said:
Yes, I’m the halfwit? I’m the troll?
You trot out, what could charitably called 'mis-truths', but what is more colloquially referred to a just 'bulls
t'. You make no effort to listen to other people, people often more expert or knowledgeable than yourself, as they attempt to explain your erroneous assumptions on which you base your belief. In fact, 'belief' is the best word to describe your knowledge, as it stands up to no scientific scrutiny what-so-ever, and no matter what proof is offered, you've made your mind up already and cannot be swayed.If you were actually interested in learning something, rather than preaching out a stream of baseless mumbo-jumbo, then the great thing about PH is that there are a lot of very smart posters on here, often with years of personal knowledge and effort invested in the automotive and engineering arena, that are generally more than willing to help people learn and understand, if those people are receptive of that help........
A standard car battery is lead acid, battery technology has been reinvented since then. Claiming an electric car isn't viable because the lead acid battery in your current car doesn't last well is a bit like saying cars are pointless because of the amount of coal you need carry on a steam engine.
PixelpeepS3 said:
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
In fact, over a typical useage pattern for a passenger car, it's far, far worse than that!EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Consider a typical VW golf diesel, that over the NEDC gets 109 g/km and 59mpg. Over that 11.023Km drive cycle the Golf uses 18.89 MJ of energy
A similarly sized BMW i3, which does 12.6 kWh/100km over the same cycle uses just 5.0 MJ.
That's 3.8 times LESS energy to drive exactly the same distance and speed!!
And the NEDC is flattering to ICE vehicles, because it has a start at 25degC way above the typical starting temperature for most passenger cars in Europe.
( I haven't included charging or Grid losses for the EV, (which are typically 2% & 7% respectively) because i haven't included the "charging losses" for the petrol vehicle (Petrol does not just magically appear in the tank of your car!) Even if we include the losses for the EV but not for the ICE, the EV still uses 3.4 times less energy)
RizzoTheRat said:
because the lead acid battery in your current car doesn't last well
Doubly erroneous because modern charging systems for Lead Acid batteries mean that modern cars don't wear out their lead acid batteries. The days of having to replace your starter battery every 3 or 5 years are long gone.(Most starter batteries fail these days because of wiring / electronic faults that cause them to be over discharged when the car is parked up.....)
OldDuffer said:
What gets me is that over their own experiences of this technology, and come on, few can have escaped car batteries? Even less could have escaped diminishing run-times with their phones. You need no more background to be conversant with cell technology as it stands today.
Some smoke and mirrors in combination with flashy faux-tech and they buy it. They refuse to see any parallel, even when pointed out. Somehow in an EV, a battery gets better. With little exception, all have me as the halfwit here.
Yes you do need more background. The fact that car batteries, being lead acid, are completely different to Li-ion batteries is pretty obvious with even a slight amount of knowledge, but if you want to start discussing parallels with mobile phones and the like, you need to understand that the batteries in these devices are not the same chemistry as those in an electric car.Some smoke and mirrors in combination with flashy faux-tech and they buy it. They refuse to see any parallel, even when pointed out. Somehow in an EV, a battery gets better. With little exception, all have me as the halfwit here.
A mobile device will likely use a lithium cobalt oxide battery. An EV will likely use a lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide battery. The latter generally has a better lifespan and energy-storage density than the former. You cannot point to a mobile phone battery dying and say that is indicitive of EV battery behaviour.
OldDuffer said:
Yes, I’m the halfwit? I’m the troll?
Certainly seems that way.PixelpeepS3 said:
Using your mobile phone example.
1994: Motorola MicroTAC Elite The user could talk for 45 minutes from a fully charged battery.
2014 - Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) talk time 14:45h
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
Sadly this is a spurious argument, phones have gained the above er.. efficiencies because today they need far less power, (we've got more masts, so hte masts do more of the work) and we've develped ways to have our receivers switched-off most of the time. Pre-smart phones were lasting a week on charge. Smartphones are back using more power again.1994: Motorola MicroTAC Elite The user could talk for 45 minutes from a fully charged battery.
2014 - Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) talk time 14:45h
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
PixelpeepS3 said:
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
I say the rant is from you rather than your 12 year old.
EV's are not the permanent fix but they are certainly better than what we are using now for a fair few of us...
i'm saving £700 odd a month - car will pay for itself in 3.8 years purely on the commute alone then even if i get £5k for it when i sell it it has worked out pretty darn good
This argument has anyone left dead in the water. You win. It's not an engineering argument, but one that avoids taxation. You win handsomely. And the self-same reason CNG works too - assuming home-fuel. Except that CNG is infinitely cheaper. The car alone, (if you can find one), can be got for £1500, and the kit to fuel it, about £4500. On your miles, pay-back in one year. Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
I say the rant is from you rather than your 12 year old.
EV's are not the permanent fix but they are certainly better than what we are using now for a fair few of us...
i'm saving £700 odd a month - car will pay for itself in 3.8 years purely on the commute alone then even if i get £5k for it when i sell it it has worked out pretty darn good
On this point, for however long our government lets it continue, EV is a winner, your argument is a winner.
So, were my point were about taxation, I lose, EV wins
You came at me first. The others, I'll come back to.
Edited by OldDuffer on Friday 15th September 14:13
pherlopolus said:
I'm just going to wait 5 years and let you see it for yourself.
Oh, I don't doubt you. We need not wait five years. The skewed fuel duty system in this country WILL make the electric car. EV wins by defualt much as die-sel has done until now, and for similar reasons. My whole point is trashed by the fact that if buyers save enough duty, who cares?Our friend PixelpeepS3 has goen EV for self-interest. And we should blame him? He'd be a fool not to be doing this.
Edited by OldDuffer on Friday 15th September 14:46
Interesting. A friend of mine works at Tesla, apparently due to the braking effect of the motors, they are removing and reinstalling brake pads that have done 50k miles or more, because they still look good as new. Braking in an electric vehicle seemingly is not an issue 
that being said, i've seen some of the bills for replacement cells and the numbers are.... eyewatering.
that being said, i've seen some of the bills for replacement cells and the numbers are.... eyewatering.
OldDuffer said:
PixelpeepS3 said:
Using your mobile phone example.
1994: Motorola MicroTAC Elite The user could talk for 45 minutes from a fully charged battery.
2014 - Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) talk time 14:45h
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
Sadly this is a spurious argument, phones have gained the above er.. efficiencies because today they need far less power, (we've got more masts, so hte masts do more of the work) and we've develped ways to have our receivers switched-off most of the time. Pre-smart phones were lasting a week on charge. Smartphones are back using more power again.1994: Motorola MicroTAC Elite The user could talk for 45 minutes from a fully charged battery.
2014 - Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) talk time 14:45h
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
I completely agree with you on taxation though, if everyone stops using ICE and buys electric cars either VED or electricity prices will go up to cover the loss of revenue from fuel duty.
PixelpeepS3 said:
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Quite. But your maths is excluding a few hops.EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Generating electricity
What % of calorific value is lost from the (let's assume) fossil fuel being burnt, to the generation of electricity (Usually turbine) ... according to most reports, approximately 65% is lost.
Moving electricity.
About 6% – 2% in transmission and 4% in distribution. Depending on methods used. it can be up to 30%
ecksjay said:
Interesting. A friend of mine works at Tesla, apparently due to the braking effect of the motors, they are removing and reinstalling brake pads that have done 50k miles or more, because they still look good as new. Braking in an electric vehicle seemingly is not an issue
that being said, i've seen some of the bills for replacement cells and the numbers are.... eyewatering.
thank god that say an M5 gearbox is a bargain to replace? that being said, i've seen some of the bills for replacement cells and the numbers are.... eyewatering.
Prizam said:
PixelpeepS3 said:
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Quite. But your maths is excluding a few hops.EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Generating electricity
What % of calorific value is lost from the (let's assume) fossil fuel being burnt, to the generation of electricity (Usually turbine) ... according to most reports, approximately 65% is lost.
Moving electricity.
About 6% – 2% in transmission and 4% in distribution. Depending on methods used. it can be up to 30%
PixelpeepS3 said:
Prizam said:
PixelpeepS3 said:
You wanna talk efficiency ?!
EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Quite. But your maths is excluding a few hops.EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels.
Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
Generating electricity
What % of calorific value is lost from the (let's assume) fossil fuel being burnt, to the generation of electricity (Usually turbine) ... according to most reports, approximately 65% is lost.
Moving electricity.
About 6% – 2% in transmission and 4% in distribution. Depending on methods used. it can be up to 30%
Rule of thumb is it takes around 6kw of energy to produce 1 gal of petrol.
6kw of electric and 1 gal of petrol take you around the same distance in a car. However... it's not that simple.
In producing that 1 gal of petrol, you also produce Gas, petrol, paraffin, diesel, "motor" oil and fuel oil. for the same 6KW input
Coupled with the fact that an electric car takes more energy (And pollutants) to build in the first instance (Almost all in the gigantic battery) the argument starts to fall down some watt.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff