All electric vehicles?

Grid is not static. Upgrades are taking place every single day. After the last decade of flat demand the utilities are actually looking forward to some revenue growth.

valhalla360 wrote:

Lantley wrote:
I think what's missing in all of this is the internal combustion engine is a dinosaur.
An electric engine is so much more efficient that we can now see the internal combustion method is obsolete!
Yes changing the infrastructure presents a few challenges, but that's the easy part.
Changing everyone's mindset will be harder than the actual physical / scientific changes.
We currently have the knowledge to make electric cars reality.
Implementing those changes will take time. But the days of the internal combustion engine are numbered.

Once the "fuel" reaches the motor, electric is more efficient but when you consider from the fuel source to the wheels...at best it's a wash.

Most power is still fossil fuels and the generating efficiency then transport over the grid have significant losses. Then storing it in the batteries adds more...it's only if you ignore these losses that you get a big efficiency jump.

Even renewable like hydro has issues. They can scale back water usage at the hoover dam late night currently to save water in the reservoirs but if suddenly they need to run at 95% of max 24-7 because EVs are soaking up any production capability, do they run the reservoirs (already having issues) dry?

Can transporting power over the grid be anymore inefficient than trucking gasoline to gas stations? Transporting crude via tankers or refined oil products via rails? None of those methods are ultra efficient!
Granted there is a tipping point, but I could charge an EV at my house right now without much effect on the grid. Especially if I charged at off peak times.

Jayco-noslide wrote:
By the time all electric cars are perfected, I wonder if we won't use another power source; fuel cells, hydrogen; etc.

I like the idea of hydrogen but it is presently dirty to make and distribution is a nightmare. Every 120 volt outlet is a fuel source for an electric BEV vehicle.

2edgesword wrote:

pianotuna wrote:
Strange that they can do peak demand for several hours without significant problems. Is there something special about doing a peak at 11:00 a.m. vs 6 p.m?

2edgesword wrote:
There is a lot of power generation between 10am and 4pm but not a lot of infrastructure to deliver it.

I think there are two issue involved.

The first is electric grid infrastructure. Everything I've read on the issue I the grid is already stressed to the breaking point. Generation may not be the central issue but delivery.

Second, solar may be part of the answer to number one in some areas but I live in the congested, crowded northeast and there is no way in many, many places that solar is going to be the answer to the power generation issue. I do not envision massive solar panel fields up and down the I-95 corridor replacing a significant number of the thousands of gas stations along that corridor anytime in the near furture (10 years). This means much of that area is going to be have to served by major remote areas of solar power generation that is transferred via an efficient electric grid to get to places along that corridor. I don't see a significant portion of it being transmitted over the existing power grid that is already under stress, especially at certain peak power consumption time during the year.

Beyond that I'm still interested to see a study that confirms EV from raw material to end of life disposal are a net benefit to the environment or that battery technology that rivals the internal combustion engine is really here in a way that is cost effective on a mass production level.

BTW, I am in no way biased againt EV. I'm an electrical engineer and have been involved with numerous corporations working on solar energy applications for over 20 years. Some tremendous advancements have been made in battery technology and solar collection but as said I still don't see a signficant percentage of the automobile industry being taken over by EV for another 20 years or so.

I tend to agree with most...if not all your post. Re the cradle to grave footprint, I do seem to have read something somewhere that indicated even in the worst case scenario of all the power being provided by coal, the EV is still a considerably lower footprint. However I can't remember where I read it and am too lazy to google it.

The big advantage is getting large numbers of ICE engines out of the city. This will clear up the air in big cities as has already been proven out in Norway. In twenty years if the majority of the auto fleet in LA is zero emission...at least from the vehicle itself...then the air is going to be considerably cleaner.

The other thing is, if their is price parity and all things equal, many will choose the EV just from a convenience and performance point of view...and this is from experience of driving nothing but EV's for almost 4 years. Test drives are very effective in generating sales. Just riding in one of our cars has generated half a dozen sales in the last four years.

By the time all electric cars are perfected, I wonder if we won't use another power source; fuel cells, hydrogen; etc.

pianotuna wrote:
Strange that they can do peak demand for several hours without significant problems. Is there something special about doing a peak at 11:00 a.m. vs 6 p.m?

2edgesword wrote:
There is a lot of power generation between 10am and 4pm but not a lot of infrastructure to deliver it.

I think there are two issue involved.

The first is electric grid infrastructure. Everything I've read on the issue I the grid is already stressed to the breaking point. Generation may not be the central issue but delivery.

Second, solar may be part of the answer to number one in some areas but I live in the congested, crowded northeast and there is no way in many, many places that solar is going to be the answer to the power generation issue. I do not envision massive solar panel fields up and down the I-95 corridor replacing a significant number of the thousands of gas stations along that corridor anytime in the near furture (10 years). This means much of that area is going to be have to served by major remote areas of solar power generation that is transferred via an efficient electric grid to get to places along that corridor. I don't see a significant portion of it being transmitted over the existing power grid that is already under stress, especially at certain peak power consumption time during the year.

Beyond that I'm still interested to see a study that confirms EV from raw material to end of life disposal are a net benefit to the environment or that battery technology that rivals the internal combustion engine is really here in a way that is cost effective on a mass production level.

BTW, I am in no way biased againt EV. I'm an electrical engineer and have been involved with numerous corporations working on solar energy applications for over 20 years. Some tremendous advancements have been made in battery technology and solar collection but as said I still don't see a signficant percentage of the automobile industry being taken over by EV for another 20 years or so.

fj12ryder wrote:

Reisender wrote:
Tesla had a quick change battery setup for awhile. Kind of an experimental thing. Most deemed it unnecessary. 97 percent of your charging is done st home while you sleep although workplace charging is growing quite quickly in areas where solar is used. And on a road trip mist stop every few hours for 15 or twenty minutes, maybe lunch. Plenty of time to take on some charge. With version 3 supercharge at 160 kw most will be happy with en route charging. Most still travel less than 500 miles in a day on a road trip.

But the fault in this thinking is that the numbers for EV's needing a recharge won't change. If EV numbers increase, then more vehicles will need to recharge and as a result, there will be waiting time. And if there are two EV's ahead of you and each takes 15-20 minutes to recharge, you're looking at more than a half hour to just get to the "pump", then 15-20 minutes for your charge. And as more people go EV's, it seems unlikely there will only be 2 people waiting in line.

Yah that’s a fact. The infrastructure needs to continue to grow. Long weekend traffic put a strain on the existing infrastructure on the west coast on thanksgiving. But it is growing. Just a matter of staying ahead of the curve. Rates need to be high enough to discourage fast charger use over home charge use. Some feel the number needs to be about three times the home rate. Myself I lean towards 4 or 5 times but that’s just me. Some recent polls on the Tesla forum are showing the vast majority of owners happy with the recent increases at Superchargers with some thinking it should be even higher. Unknown territory for fast charge providers and the “right” number will eventually be found. Nice to see enough providers getting into it that there is now competition though. Charge point and EVGo are our favourites because of how smooth the app works with their stations. I have never had a single glitch with either.

Reisender wrote:
Tesla had a quick change battery setup for awhile. Kind of an experimental thing. Most deemed it unnecessary. 97 percent of your charging is done st home while you sleep although workplace charging is growing quite quickly in areas where solar is used. And on a road trip mist stop every few hours for 15 or twenty minutes, maybe lunch. Plenty of time to take on some charge. With version 3 supercharge at 160 kw most will be happy with en route charging. Most still travel less than 500 miles in a day on a road trip.

But the fault in this thinking is that the numbers for EV's needing a recharge won't change. If EV numbers increase, then more vehicles will need to recharge and as a result, there will be waiting time. And if there are two EV's ahead of you and each takes 15-20 minutes to recharge, you're looking at more than a half hour to just get to the "pump", then 15-20 minutes for your charge. And as more people go EV's, it seems unlikely there will only be 2 people waiting in line.

Lynnmor wrote:

Me Again wrote:
A group of us were talking the other day during a break in racing our electric LiPo powered RC trucks on the snowbird parks paved oval track. The thought hit us that to make electric road cars viable they need quick change batteries like we us on out RC stuff.

"

I don't think LiPo is ready for prime time, at least for automobiles.

LiPo batteries should be charged within a temperature range of 0C to 50C. Batteries charged outside this temperature range may experience leakage, heat generation or cell damage.

Information

Tesla had a quick change battery setup for awhile. Kind of an experimental thing. Most deemed it unnecessary. 97 percent of your charging is done st home while you sleep although workplace charging is growing quite quickly in areas where solar is used. And on a road trip most stop every few hours for 15 or twenty minutes, maybe lunch. Plenty of time to take on some charge. With version 3 supercharge at 160 kw most will be happy with en route charging. Most still travel less than 500 miles in a day on a road trip.

Me Again wrote:
A group of us were talking the other day during a break in racing our electric LiPo powered RC trucks on the snowbird parks paved oval track. The thought hit us that to make electric road cars viable they need quick change batteries like we us on out RC stuff.

"

I don't think LiPo is ready for prime time, at least for automobiles.

LiPo batteries should be charged within a temperature range of 0C to 50C. Batteries charged outside this temperature range may experience leakage, heat generation or cell damage.

Information