Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Who Killed the Electric Car?

E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?

Hybrid, not hydrogen. Actually PHEVs are the best. The P being for 'plug in' so it
can be recharged from both the electricity mains and its internal (small) ICE.

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
Hydrogen?

Hydrogen is a scam. And highly explosive and difficult to store and 101 other bad
things.

Where's that going to be coming from?

It currently comes mainly from fossil fuels of course !

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
David L. Jones said:
I just saw the movie Who Killed the Electric Car?:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/

Fantastic!

It completely misses the point.

Everyone should watch this one.
The IMDB user comment is spot on - " This film WILL frustrate you greatly"
In fact, it's enough to make you want to cry.

Can't believe I had never heard of the movie before the other day.

http://gm-volt.com/2008/05/11/the-ev-1-wasnt-killed-it-was-dead-on-arrival/

Required to do so, GM went on to make the EV-1. It used lead acid batteries
which held 0.4% as much energy as the same weight of gasoline. Thus the EV-1
weighed 2970 lbs, 1175 lbs of which were the batteries. The resulting range
was 90/70 miles hwy/city. To achieve this, the tiny two-seater also had to
have the record lowest CD, the most advanced powertrain of the day, and a cost
of $80,000 (they were only leased to consumers).

The article concludes:

“In the end, though, the price wasn’t an issue. The reality is the EV1 was
hostage to a technology the engineers knew from the get-go just wasn’t able to
do the job Roger Smith and the California Air Resources Board believed it
could. That’s what killed the electric car.”

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
Fact is, Toyota has recognized the signs of the time and GM has not. They'll
better get
cracking on it, and soon.

They've been cracking on it quite some time. e.g.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/05/14/big-n...ype-hits-the-road-and-gets-40-miles-electric/

In the biggest news since the initial concept announcement, GM vice-chairman Bob
Lutz confirmed that in fact the first Chevy Volt prototype, with the full
lithium-ion battery pack has hit the test track.

He said “It is reliably meeting its objectives. Even with a rough calibration,
even with the wrong drive unit, the wrong body, etc. etc., it has been hitting its
40 miles on electric power."

And GM Europe are working on the Opel Flextreme which will have a diesel generator
for even higher efficiency.
http://gm-volt.com/2007/09/10/the-opel-flextreme/

http://bp0.blogger.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk.../deDSsV_OkJE/s1600-h/Carscoop_Opel_EEF_14.jpg

That's some electric motor and generator.

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
One former EV-1 owner has a solution to the electric power cost
problem:
<http://www.solarwarrior.com>
<http://www.solarwarrior.com/why.html>

A 30kW peak output PV solar array would cost somewhere in the region of
$120,000 in panels alone by my estimation yet would only provide around
120kWh of electricity daily (worth around $12) on average. Factor in
financing costs and it simply will NEVER 'pay back'

Scale that down to a 12kWh EV battery pack daily recharge and it would still
cost you $12,000 PLUS and the associated installation, inverter etc, say
$20k overall. Yet it would only cost about $1.20 for that daily recharge
from the mains.

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim said:
Joerg wrote

there's talk lately about new utility power meters that will meter your
service according to time of usage so they can bill you extra for using
power during high demand times.Coming soon,I suspect.

Pretty much inevitable I'd say, especially with smart meters that can be
reporgrammed over the power lines.

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
When GM discontinued the EV-1 in 2003, the unofficial
waiting list was over 2000+ names. Lack of interest was never a
problem.

No car of this ilk can be a viable commercial venture on the basis of a
couple of thousand sales !

Graham
 
T

T

Jan 1, 1970
0
Not if you live in an area where electricity cost versus monthly usage
has the I/V characteristic of a silicon diode. Out here when you reach
130% of baseline that would be the 600mV point. Go beyond that and
you'll hear a huge slurping sound. That sound would be coming from your
bank account. And that happens in a lot of other places, too.

That's ok, I just got a notice that National Grid is hiking electric
rates in RI again. It's bad enough that with the combined distribution
and generation charges we pay 14.5 cents per kWh. I don't know how much
more I can bear of this.

Deregulation, yeah it's only good for the company not for the people.
 
D

David L. Jones

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
Since when is that range a fixed requirement ?

I've 'commuted' as little as 20-25 miles daily and as far as 100 miles. I
don't
really want to have to buy a new car every time I find a new client!

Geeze, then don't buy an EV!

It's simple, an EV car has a certain spec, if that spec doesn't meet your
anticipated requirements then don't buy it. Just the same as any other car
or bike or whatever.
Just WTF do you have against (P)HEVs ? It's clear that they fix ALL the
arguments against EVs in a trice (except for not being able to hear them)
and
provide just as much benefit.

Who said I had anything against HEV's? I don't.

I just like EV's better, I think they are cool. I'd prefer to have an
electric only car.
They aren't for everyone, just like anything else, but that doesn't mean
they are crap and shouldn't be available for those that want them.

Dave.
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
That is a bit more than presumptuous.

And that is near the a reasonable objective.
You will live where we (the central planning bureau) want you to. You
will shop where we tell you to.

Our region (the Seattle area) is going through a fiasco called light
rail that seems to be designed to feed customers and employees into one
area (downtown Seattle). Any attempts to relocate the route, even a few
blocks, to serve another major shopping mall (Southcenter) were shot
down by the downtown gang. We certainly can't have shoppers go to the
wrong mall.
Typical.


The route was carefully designed to pass through neighborhoods (poor,
low income neighborhoods) where friends of the planners had made shrewd
real estate investments. A competing plan intended to serve existing
residential areas was shot down. We can't boost the property values in
areas where the good ol' boys haven't managed to corner the market.

Also typical.
The earliest incarnation of the project was supposed to run from
Everett, through downtown Seattle (and be funded by Everett residents as
well). Trouble was, the downtown Seattle planners refused to extend the
line into downtown Everett. Instead, there would be a park-and-ride a
mile or so south, where people could catch the train to Seattle. God
forbid that someone might actually take it in "the wrong direction" to
work, thereby propping up the economy of the Everett business district.
Typical.


Don't get me wrong. I think mass transit is a decent idea. But only if
the central planners don't try to use it as a tool to divert my money
into the pockets of their favored business partners. Rail seems to be
favored by these folks because, after sinking billions into a fixed
system, they can argue for further tax funds to rescue the investment.
If they went with buses, they could just change the routes to match
demand.

Maybe you could be starting to get it.
 
M

Mauried

Jan 1, 1970
0
My home doesn't have a garage with power point or otherwise. To recharge an EV
I'd have to trail a power lead across the footpath which is clearly ridiculous.
That's if I can park directly in front of my own house which I usually can't.

Here's one for sale in my road for nearly $1 mill that doesn't have one either.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-18757154.rsp?pa_n=2&tr_t=buy

There is LESS THAN ONE car parking space per house (each house is about 13 feet
wide).

You need to consider that not everyone lives in the USA where you have many
acres per person of land space. The same problem also occurs in some US cities
too.

Graham

Peoole always for some reason assume that there are only 3 Car
manufactures in the world and that somehow they have all got together
in some to way conspire to not make electric cars.
The sad fact is that no one is making electric cars, at least not
electric cars that people want to buy.
Why arnt some of the Asian manufacturers like Hyundai or Daewoo making
electric cars.
Same reason GM isnt, they arnt viable yet, and they wont be viable
until someone invents a low cost hi energy density battery.
Lithium Ions dont even come close .

Have you ever wondered why Toyota wont mass produce a PHEV version of
the Prius.
They have made one.
 
P

Phil Hobbs

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
A small business can expense about $120K a year in equipment
purchases. The big boys have to show equipment and real estate and
improvements as assets, ie as taxable profit, which the public doesn't
generally understand. No wonder we export jobs.

But in the 1992 situation, they could have had a garage sale for
employees, got rid of the stuff at a suitable loss, and made some
employees very happy. I think.

John
That's probably true, but what would I do with a $2m copper dep tool?

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
David L. Jones said:
Sounds like it's you who missed the point of the movie.

To tell vast and extravagant lies about the EV1 ? No I hadn't missed that at all.


Irrelevant.

Highly relevant to the motive power required.

Also irrelevant.

And how exactly is it irrelevant ?

Plenty enough for the majority of people.

Only if you also have a second car. And as long as you NEVER find your plans
changed and need to do a longer trip.

Especially when you can
conveniently recharge at home, at work, or at a shopping centre etc.

You can't be assured of conveniently recharging in any of those places.

So what? price would come down in time.
Thousands of people buy $80,00 cars every day.

The myth that it'll get cheaper 'just like that'. IThat's simply inorant
nonsense.

No excuse for GM to go to ridiculous lengths to get back every one of the
cars

No ridiculous lengths were required. The cars were always the property of GM.

and then crush them literally out of existence. Especially when there
were thousands who would have taken them off their hands and waived all
rights to support.
GM did an evil thing, just evil.

Oh poor diddums.

Everyone had better rush and get one of those Humvees with the $100,000 Bush
government tax rebate before the new government gets in. Or has that
fire-sale finished already?

What a stupid comment !

Graham
 
T

T

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rhode Island or Republic of Ireland ?

Graham

The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations to be precise.

You wouldn't believe how upset the "Plantations" part makes certain
people.
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
<...>

True, although the Prius is more of a Hybrid-Hybrid: At low speeds it
is a series hybrid with the majority of the engine power going to a
generator and then to the motor driving the wheels with only a small
amount directly from engine to wheels.

At high speeds the situation is reversed and it acts more like a
parallel hybrid with a large fraction, up to 100% of engine power,
going straight to the wheels.

This is done to maximize efficiency since the mechanical transmission
has an efficiency of 95% or more but the electrical losses through two
motor/generators are about 20%.

That is way past remarkably crappy motor and generator efficiencies.
Both are typically each 95 to 98 percent efficient. Hell the antique
"Molly Long Legs" topped 99%.
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
It _did_ pass the emission test. In Germany, back then it was voluntary
for this car but I wanted to know. Crash worthiness is an issue though
but that's because the design was done without regard in that domain.
The car had a real double I-beam frame and the tank was inbetween,
almost bullet proof.

It may have passed some very early emissions tests but it was its emissions
that finally killed it.

Graham
 
K

kevin93

Jan 1, 1970
0
That is way past remarkably crappy motor and generator efficiencies.
Both are typically each 95 to 98 percent efficient. Hell the antique
"Molly Long Legs" topped 99%.
<...>

I don't know about those you mention but the published peak efficiency
of the ones in the Prius (including the inverter) are about 93%, put
two in series and the losses to convert from mechanical energy back to
mechanical energy when operating at peak efficiency would be about 15%
- for other operating conditions they can be a lot worse, hence my 20%
number.

AC Propulsion (www.acpropulsion.com) only claim 91% from battery to
shaft for their system with 86% with a "road load" (implying an
average under normal usage). That is even lower than the Toyota
figure.

When considering regenerative efficiency the numbers get even worse -
the battery may only have a 70% efficiency giving only a 50% overall
energy recovery efficiency.

Undoubtedly the efficiency could be improved but would add weight and
cost - Toyota and Honda are the only manufacturers with real-world
experience of producing this class of machines in million unit
quantities so presumably these designs represent their view of the
optimum compromise for this application

kevin
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
Not really. The A123 Systems batteries are HD Nanophosphate
technology which is allegedly better than conventional Li-Ion and LiPO
batteries. Although commonly used in overpriced battery operated
power tools, there's really not enough field experience to predict
reliability and lifetime.
<http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/power/pchart1/>

"Thousands and thousands" of charge cycles lifetime:
<http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/life/>
Sounds a bit vague to me.

Fast Charging:


That's high luxury compared to taking a shower with a rooftop solar
water heater. I got introduced to those in the 1970's in Israel.
Israel has lots of sun, lots of rooftops, and isn't insterested in
wasting power heating what water it pulls out of the Jordan River.
Haifa was literally covered with apartment buildings. The ground
floor was reserved for businesses. The rest were apartments which
were sold, not rented. Every apartment had its solar water heater on
the roof (along with multiple TV antennas at the time) which made
things rather crowded.

Anyway, when you first turn on the water, you get the somewhat warm
water that was sitting in the pipes. About 15 seconds later, you get
scalded by maximumly hot, near boiling, water directly from the solar
water heater. That slowly tapers off in temperature as the rooftop
heater slowly empties. I learned to take a shower with one hand on
the valves.

I've done the same with flash water heaters. They do a somewhat
better job of temperature regulation, but without a ballast tank,
constant adjustment is required. Still, it's more energy efficient
than a tank type water heater. Sacrifices must be made.

Most of the stuff sold for residential use is so incredibly crude. I
mean, what would it take to design an automatic mixer between hot and
cold? It ain't rocket science and has been done before.

[...]
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
Sounds like you guys need to form your own co-operatives to supply your own power.

But from what? Usually water rights and all that have been divvied up
"appropriately" many moons ago.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
T said:
That's ok, I just got a notice that National Grid is hiking electric
rates in RI again. It's bad enough that with the combined distribution
and generation charges we pay 14.5 cents per kWh. I don't know how much
more I can bear of this.

Deregulation, yeah it's only good for the company not for the people.

Deregulation can be good if there is competition. Airline travel was
pretty much restricted to upper class folks before deregulation. But
deregulation while keeping monopolies in place is IMHO not a good thing.
 
Top