Electric cars

[Spehro Pefhany]

How much of your car battery capacity would you be willing to sacrifice to
load level the grid?

Probably up to half on a regular basis. Usually, I don't care if my
gas tank is half full or compltely full. Particularly if I got the
energy for half price.

If you are prepared to sacrifice a significant amount what is the point
lugging a heavy half empty battery around the country with you? Why not
have a smaller battery to start with?

Because sometimes I need more range, but that's not often, and I
usually know in advance. Most of us have access to more than one
vehicle so it doesn't have be right 100% of the time.

What does a daily (twice daily?) charge/discharge cycle do for the already
short life of lithium batteries?

Battery technology needs to be up to the job.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Yes, nuclear would solve a lot of problems, like CO2 and "dependence on
foreign oil".

The REAL problem is, how do we get this information through the thick
skulls of the paranoid bureaucrats?

Thanks,
Rich

Encase it in DU?

 

[Bob Eld]

message
Snip..

Yes. Just go sit in the corner. Suck your thumb. Then bend over.

Obama, with Al Gore's assistance, will make it feel good ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Think things are bad now? Wait until Obama "takes care" of you.

Uh Huh! We certainly can see what happens when CONservative republicans
"take care" of us. It's Herbert Hoover time all over again and ain't
pretty! Thank you president Bush!

 

[Jim Yanik]

[...]
Imagine a family with two electric cars. 100HP (75kW) engine each -
not too big, is it? On an average workday each driver commutes for on
hour [...]
Do we have an infrastructure to support it?

On average, a car needs nowhere near 75kW. Some 10 to 15kW
should do fine. Even so, you are right to believe that the
current infrastructure wouldn't suffice if everyone used
electric cars.

Jeroen Belleman

But, of course, not everyone will buy an electric car immediately when
they become available. As more and more cars come on line, then the
electric company will be doing some dancing to put in all the
additional service throughout all the towns and cities to support the
additional demand

Either that, or solar chargers of some sort will become extremely
popular...

Charlie

how do you charge by solar at NIGHT? The vehicles will be at work during
the day.

 

[James Arthur]

James Arthur wrote:

Wait until Oregon establishes their "road tax" based on mileage data
obtained from GPS ;-)

...Jim Thompson

To replace lost gas tax revenue, right? People are driving less,
which is good, so let's tax 'em more.

However much Oregon charges, it won't be enough--as soon as
people start getting their bills, they'll quit driving.

Good for green GPS jobs though.

Clinton promised a BTU tax, which I actually liked--energy
conservation is in the national interest. He backed off
though once elected--the idea was VERY unpopular.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Jim Yanik]

* As just one example, in order to meet environmental regulations in
the US, Toyota Prius's sold here must restrict their battery use to
something like just 7% of their available battery capacity -- any
more, and the projected life of the battery pack falls below the magic
10 years mandated by the EPA. Relax that rule, let the battery pack
become a 2- or 5-year maintenance item, and you could save a lot of
gasoline right here right now -- but the lefty fundamentalists
wouldn't stand for it, because someone, somewhere, might actually make
a profit.

WHO wants to have to replace and PAY for a MAJOR expensive
component(battery pack) on a **2 yr old** auto?
It sure isn't going to be a warranty replacement.

That's a deal-breaker right there.There'd be NO savings in having an
electric auto.

And that "global warming" hooey IS hooey.

 

[Jim Yanik]

As a first step to ultraefficiency, superlight, streamlined cars
make sense.

Essentially,enclosed electric scooters.

Or electric Smart4Two.(I read they're making them now...)

 

[Charlie E.]

WHO wants to have to replace and PAY for a MAJOR expensive
component(battery pack) on a **2 yr old** auto?
It sure isn't going to be a warranty replacement.

That's a deal-breaker right there.There'd be NO savings in having an
electric auto.

And that "global warming" hooey IS hooey.

Hey, are we engineers, or what?

simple, you make the battery 'pack' out of smaller modules, each with
the intelligence to monitor their own charge/discharge cycles,
temperature, performance, etc. Then, when you have a cell go bad, you
raplace a $100 module instead of a $8000 battery pack.

Charlie

 

[James Arthur]

WHO wants to have to replace and PAY for a MAJOR expensive
component(battery pack) on a **2 yr old** auto?
It sure isn't going to be a warranty replacement.

That's a deal-breaker right there.There'd be NO savings in having an
electric auto.

And that "global warming" hooey IS hooey.

Hooey or no, conservation's still in the national interest.
It doesn't make economic sense to send boatloads of cash
out of country for something we could live equally well using
a lot less of.

Conservation's really bad for oil exporters like Canada and
Mexico, but good for us.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[James Arthur]

Essentially,enclosed electric scooters.

Or electric Smart4Two.(I read they're making them now...)

No!! There's a load on Amory Lovin's Rocky Mountain Institute
website, but the gist is you can make a same-size car a bunch
lighter with lightweight materials. Then, it needs less power
plant to propel it, so you can use a smaller engine for equal
performance, which makes it lighter still. Both measures save
gas. It's a virtuous circle.

He also addresses making such a car _safer_ than current cars
with simple, energy-absorbing cones placed inside.

Propulsion technology is a separate, independent issue: the
improved body design equally benefits gas, hybrids, and electrics.

There's an _excellent_ video on the site, but it takes an hour
to watch. .PDF notes of the presentation too. (hard to interpret
without watching the video)

Good stuff. Really.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[James Arthur]

I palled around with Amory Lovins for a few days at the National
Science Fair in Baltimore, ca 1963. He was fun and smart but a bit
priggish and judgemental.

He still comes off that way, and I did catch him stretching a few
points in his Stanford lecture videos.

But he's obviously right when he says that cutting 'm' in half
saves half of (1/2) m * v^2, and doubles a = F/m.

For the same acceleration, a half-weight car needs half the
gas. Rather than go smaller, Lovins does it by lightweight
materials and design.

His preferred material is a carbon-fiber composite. That's
not currently cheap, but he argues that it easily could be.

James

 

[Nobody]

Because sometimes I need more range, but that's not often, and I
usually know in advance. Most of us have access to more than one
vehicle so it doesn't have be right 100% of the time.

Almost everyone has access to more than one vehicle; it's called "rental".

It would be good if people would take this into account before buying a
minibus for their daily commute on the grounds that it "needs" to cope
with the annual family holiday.

 

[Nobody]

Yes, nuclear would solve a lot of problems, like CO2 and "dependence on
foreign oil".

The REAL problem is, how do we get this information through the thick
skulls of the paranoid bureaucrats?

The REAL problem is, how do we get this information through the thick
skulls of the paranoid public that crap themselves at any mention of the
word "nuclear"?

Maybe we should take every possible opportunity to point out that smoke
detectors rely upon a RADIOACTIVE!!! source and let house fires get rid of
the nucleophobes.

Mentioning the amount of thorium released by burning coal doesn't seem to
work; they just assume it's another anti-coal greenie lie.

 

[krw]

What on earth makes you think that ?

History. You refuse to learn from it, so you'll repeat it. Often.

How about another US Mexico war ?

Nope. Mexico is going tits up on its own.

 

[krw]

message
Snip..

[snip SIG left by inadequate newsreader :-]

Uh Huh! We certainly can see what happens when CONservative republicans
"take care" of us. It's Herbert Hoover time all over again and ain't
pretty! Thank you president Bush!

Nonsense, Bob! And you know it. General de-regulation by _both_
parties allowed this economic situation to happen.

The mess was caused by REGULATION. No 'DE-' about it. F&F weren't
deregulated into existence, nor were they deregulated into backing
bad loans. See: California + Power

Obama's "fix" ain't going to fix it.

Read up on FDR's "fix". If we hadn't had a war, we'd still be in soup
lines.

It took LBJ to make a bigger mess than FDR. Obama bin Biden is
about to make them look like punk kids.

We should have let the banks "fail". Our only cost would be FDIC
coverage... far less than we're blowing now.

There are a lot of thigns that should have been done.

And the car companies... let 'em die.

Not dead, just bankrupt. Let them rise from the ashes, without the
UAW. ...or not. UAW's choice.

But the Obama/Pelosi Congress is about to _require_ unions.

That ought to be neat ;-)

Pretty much.

We'd be better off with the Mafia running our country.

"Protection" is cheaper.

 

[Bob Eld]

Nonsense, Bob! And you know it. General de-regulation by _both_
parties allowed this economic situation to happen.

Obama's "fix" ain't going to fix it.

Read up on FDR's "fix". If we hadn't had a war, we'd still be in soup
lines.

Why did the war finally end the depression??? Massive federal spending
causing full employment, that's why. Week spending, tax cuts and other
gimmicks will NOT do it.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Almost everyone has access to more than one vehicle; it's called "rental".

Zipcars seem to be popular around here among the single/no car
urbanites:

http://www.zipcar.com/

Of course it won't fly in the 'burbs where you need a car to get the
convenience store.

Also Home Despot has what looks like a low hassle 'local only' truck
rental for a reasonable price.

It would be good if people would take this into account before buying a
minibus for their daily commute on the grounds that it "needs" to cope
with the annual family holiday.

If you have a couple of kids who play hockey and/or baseball it fills
up a moderately large vehicle pretty quickly. Even faster if one or
more of them is a goalie or catcher.

 

[krw]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:56:02 +0100, Jeroen Belleman

Michael wrote:
[...]
Imagine a family with two electric cars. 100HP (75kW) engine each -
not too big, is it? On an average workday each driver commutes for on
hour [...]
Do we have an infrastructure to support it?

On average, a car needs nowhere near 75kW. Some 10 to 15kW
should do fine. Even so, you are right to believe that the
current infrastructure wouldn't suffice if everyone used
electric cars.

Jeroen Belleman


But, of course, not everyone will buy an electric car immediately when
they become available. As more and more cars come on line, then the
electric company will be doing some dancing to put in all the
additional service throughout all the towns and cities to support the
additional demand

Either that, or solar chargers of some sort will become extremely
popular...

Charlie

how do you charge by solar at NIGHT? The vehicles will be at work during
the day.

Obama will require you to work at night, and sleep during the day ;-)

How is he going to expect people to work after he bankrupts all the
businesses?

 

[JeffM]

Yes, nuclear would solve a lot of problems,
like CO2 and "dependence on foreign oil".

The REAL problem is, how do we get this information
through the thick skulls of the paranoid bureaucrats?

Have them talk to Amory Lovins:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...re-bang-*-*-*-installing-alternatives&strip=1

Oh, wait. You want MORE nukes.
If it *was* such a great idea,
nuke plants would be springing up like mushrooms
--or like wind turbines actually ARE springing up.
People's investments are a measure of viability.
Nukes aren't getting any of that because they are dirty in perpetuity.
(All the nuclear waste produced in the USA since ~1943
STILL exists--on the grounds of the plants where it became waste.)

 

[Sylvia Else]

No!! There's a load on Amory Lovin's Rocky Mountain Institute
website, but the gist is you can make a same-size car a bunch
lighter with lightweight materials. Then, it needs less power
plant to propel it, so you can use a smaller engine for equal
performance, which makes it lighter still. Both measures save
gas. It's a virtuous circle.

A large part of the power required to drive a car at a reasoable speed
is used to overcome aerodynamic drag. Making the vehicle lighter makes
little diference, because it doesn't allow much reduction in the frontal
area, which is largely determined by the passenger cabin dimensions.

Sylvia.