Wednesday 5th February 2014

US coast-to-coast drive for Tesla Model S

It's happened! Three days and three thousand miles in an EV

---

Range, range, range, range. And charging infrastructure. Eventually, that's what EV discussion always boils down to. That and the battery life. Well Tesla now thinks it has shown a way round the issue by driving a pair of Model S saloons coast-to-coast across the US using its Supercharger network of quick chargers.

What a clean Model S look like

The 3,464 mile journey took 76 hours and used 1,197.8 kWh of electricity. Tesla is hoping to claim a world record for "lowest charge time for an electric vehicle travelling across the United States." The two cars (called Thunder and Lightning, in case you were wondering) were supported by two petrol powered support vehicles. As it turned out, the support vehicles struggled, one of them breaking down in South Dakota's freezing temperatures. Irony surely much appreciated by Mr Musk.

There are over 70 Supercharger sites currently in the US, able to replenish add 170 miles of range in 30 minutes. However they are only suitable for the Model S right now, unlike conventional rapid chargers.

Still it remains quite a feat for an electric car, and shows the infrastructure is developing (for Teslas at least!). In Europe, Tesla claims there are enough Superchargers to reach the Alps from Amsterdam, through Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Bu the end of March, Tesla reckons half of the German population will live within 200 miles of a Supercharger

[Source: Autoblog]

[bashful]

I look forward to our kids and grandkids not understanding why this is a big deal, like when you read old reports of driving a Rolls-Royce from London to Scotland in only three days.

[LovesSweetExile]

Pleased to see the steady improvements that Tesla are making in both vehicle efficiency and the infrastructure behind keeping them going.

[Devil2575]

It's impressive that rate at which the technology is developing.

How many years before EVs are a genuine alternative for everyone?

[Bash Brannigan]

So if Musk is ploughing his billions into this and charging stations, does that mean he's going to licence out the fast charge car technology and thus he'll have almost a monopoly on electric car running system market? Tesla sounds very impressive all ways on, and this is a great achievement.

[26jcd]

As a TVR owning petrol head I am all for electric power. The more the technology advances, the better the future looks in terms of the electric car!

Who knows, Tesla might end up using a TVR as a basis for one of it's models

[r11co]

PH said:

There are over 70 Supercharger sites currently in the US, able to add 170 miles of range in 30 minutes.
...
By the end of March, Tesla reckons half of the German population will live within 200 miles of a Supercharger.

Hmmm.

Still think this is a load of cobblers though. Hybrids and energy recovery systems kind of make sense from a conservation and economic point of view, but purely electric vehicles are a gimmick as the electrical energy still has to be generated somewhere (and that somewhere will most likely be using a method not liked by the ecomentalists).

[Devil2575]

r11co said:

Hmmm.

Still think this is a load of cobblers though. Hybrids and energy recovery systems kind of make sense from a conservation and economic point of view, but purely electric vehicles are a gimmick as the electrical energy still has to be generated somewhere (and that somewhere will most likely be using a method not liked by the ecomentalists).

I've often wondered why people continue to use the same old arguments that have been discussed at length in the past.

I suspect the reason is that they actually just don't like the thought of EVs but can't think of any sensible objections anymore so just keeping banging the same old drum.

[howertings]

How does this compare with the energy usage of an ordinary ICE car for the same journey, I thought to myself.
Well, my rough and ready calc came out as follows:

Energy usage per Tesla = 1200/2 kWh per car = 600 kWh per car
With 1kWh = 3.6MJ then
Energy usage per Tesla = 600x3.6MJ = 2160MJ
With, say, a 50% efficiency in the electricity generation and distribution system then
"Gross" energy required per Tesla = 2060/0.5MJ = 4120MJ

For an economical ordinary ICE car, say fuel consumption of 5.0l/100km,
then for a journey of 3464 miles = 5540km
Fuel consumption = 5540x0.05 litres = 277 litres
With an energy density of 35MJ/l then
Energy usage = 277x35MJ = 9700MJ
Allowing say 2.0kWh per litre to refine and distribute gasoline then
Energy required to supply gasoline = 277x2.0x3.6MJ = 2000MJ
So "Gross" energy required per ICE car = 9700 + 2000 MJ = 11700MJ

So the electric car in use would appear to require less than 40% of the energy of an ordinary ICE car. Hmmmmm.....

[LovesSweetExile]

r11co said:

Hmmm.

Still think this is a load of cobblers though. Hybrids and energy recovery systems kind of make sense from a conservation and economic point of view, but purely electric vehicles are a gimmick as the electrical energy still has to be generated somewhere (and that somewhere will most likely be using a method not liked by the ecomentalists).

I believe (though may be wrong) that the generation of electricity in power stations is massively more efficient than the internal combustion engine. In fact, the ICE is a hugely inefficient when you consider how much power is lost due to the inefficiencies of running a drivetrain?

[Fartgalen]

Sounds like a reasonable achievement. But still. 170 miles and then you have to stop for half an hour ?

[LovesSweetExile]

Fartgalen said:

Sounds like a reasonable achievement. But still. 170 miles and then you have to stop for half an hour ?

I don't see this as much of a problem in the UK. I can't think of the last time I did >170 miles non-stop. I of course realise that I can't speak for everyone but for the vast and overwhelming majority of drivers, I believe I'm in the majority.

[Ex Boy Racer]

I ordered one a few weeks ago as it made a lot of sense for my London - Bristol travels. Unfortunately, I had to cancel the order as the range simply wasn't sufficient and non-supercharger charging is very slow.
I'm still waiting for my £2k deposit back. They're a lot more efficient taking it than returning it.
Unfortunate because everything else about the customer interaction was top-notch

[LovesSweetExile]

Besides, we as enthusiasts should be celebrating and encouraging anything which takes demand off fossil fuels, if Keynesian economics are to be believed.

Edited by LovesSweetExile on Wednesday 5th February 13:37

[ewenm]

LovesSweetExile said:

r11co said:

Hmmm.

Still think this is a load of cobblers though. Hybrids and energy recovery systems kind of make sense from a conservation and economic point of view, but purely electric vehicles are a gimmick as the electrical energy still has to be generated somewhere (and that somewhere will most likely be using a method not liked by the ecomentalists).

I believe (though may be wrong) that the generation of electricity in power stations is massively more efficient than the internal combustion engine. In fact, the ICE is a hugely inefficient when you consider how much power is lost due to the inefficiencies of running a drivetrain?

And all the pollution is in one place where it can be better handled, away from city centres.

bashful said:

I look forward to our kids and grandkids not understanding why this is a big deal, like when you read old reports of driving a Rolls-Royce from London to Scotland in only three days.

[Devil2575]

LovesSweetExile said:

Fartgalen said:

Sounds like a reasonable achievement. But still. 170 miles and then you have to stop for half an hour ?

I don't see this as much of a problem in the UK. I can't think of the last time I did >170 miles non-stop. I of course realise that I can't speak for everyone but for the vast and overwhelming majority of drivers, I believe I'm in the majority.

I'm with you.

I never drive for more than 3 hours without stopping for a break. I'm not one of these macho "I drove 500 miles without stopping" types

[McWigglebum4th]

Fartgalen said:

Sounds like a reasonable achievement. But still. 170 miles and then you have to stop for half an hour ?

With the battery swap he is also rolling out you have to stop for 45 seconds to recharge

It won't be car endurance that will cause the issue it will be human endurance

[McWigglebum4th]

Devil2575 said:

It's impressive that rate at which the technology is developing.

How many years before EVs are a genuine alternative for everyone?

They never will be an alternative for everyone

But current tech allows them to be a useable alterative for most people


Well apart from the powerfully built people who live in a 28floor flat with no parking within ten miles who commute 800 miles a day after sleeping for 8 minutes a night

[SteveSteveson]

LovesSweetExile said:

Fartgalen said:

Sounds like a reasonable achievement. But still. 170 miles and then you have to stop for half an hour ?

I don't see this as much of a problem in the UK. I can't think of the last time I did >170 miles non-stop. I of course realise that I can't speak for everyone but for the vast and overwhelming majority of drivers, I believe I'm in the majority.

Yes, but when a charging point is 200 miles away it makes it somewhat of a problem. Unless someone can come up with a way of charging plug in EV's in approximately the time it takes to fill a petrol tank they will never be any good for people who do not have a house with off street parking, which is the majority of people in the UK.

I wouldn't see a problem with a mixed ecosystem of different fueling methods, but I can't see the government doing anything but ramping tax up and up on petrol once plugins become mainstream, crippling those who don't have somewhere to charge cars overnight.

[r11co]

Devil2575 said:

I've often wondered why people continue to use the same old arguments that have been discussed at length in the past.

I suspect the reason is that they actually just don't like the thought of EVs but can't think of any sensible objections anymore so just keeping banging the same old drum.

Just because arguments are well worn doesn't make them invalid.

As I said, I am all for energy recovery and efficiency, but EVs are made out to be some panacea when the reality is that their true environmental cost is just being hidden away somewhere else. It really is all about 'being seen' to be environmentally friendly (and for Musk this is just some sort of high-tech penance. The 'eye of the needle' story, modernised).

Hypocrisy springs to mind!

Edited by r11co on Wednesday 5th February 14:33

[kambites]

r11co said:

Devil2575 said:

I've often wondered why people continue to use the same old arguments that have been discussed at length in the past.

I suspect the reason is that they actually just don't like the thought of EVs but can't think of any sensible objections anymore so just keeping banging the same old drum.

Just because arguments are well worn doesn't make them invalid.

As I said, I am all for energy recovery and efficiency, but EVs are made out to be some panacea when the reality is that their true environmental cost is just being hidden away somewhere else.

Hypocrisy springs to mind!

But as above, electric cars work out more economical in terms of total energy consumption than ICE powered ones and the energy can be generated in places where the pollution matters much less to human health. Even if you work out the production costs, including mining rare materials etc., electric cars seem to at worst match ICE powered one for energy cost and they still have the enormous advantage that you can generate your energy away from people and from a greater variety of fuels.

There are some very real reasons to doubt the usefulness of pure EV cars, but their energy efficiency is not one of them. For now, their biggest barrier is purchase cost.

Edited by kambites on Wednesday 5th February 14:38