1000 km range electric car !
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Slick Solution: How Microbes Will Clean Up the Deepwater HorizonOil Spill
Next: Iarnbored makes HUGE stinking turd pile in newsgroups by hating peace and worshipping war criminals Bush and Cheney
From: Alex P. on 29 May 2010 12:12 "T. Keating" <tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:5l2206t7h8cd8l1og97n5jumv5ecj6pvaa(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 29 May 2010 07:39:22 GMT, "Alex P." <alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>"T. Keating" <tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> ha scritto nel messaggio >>news:6bi00619peocks03vfclnbhcopvld8uleg(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:16:48 GMT, "Alex P." <alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> soc newsgroups snipped in this reply.. >>> >>>> >>>>"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> ha scritto nel messaggio >>>>news:5n7sv5tumujj5jkts64098t8hgq5aq0uuv(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:00:53 GMT, habshi(a)anony.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>photo on >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/mira-ev-shatters-previous-record-by-running-more-than-1000km-on-a-single-charge/ >>>>>>Cant find youtube video >>>>>> >>>>>>Amazing stuff! Now wind and solar energy will supply all our transport >>>>>>needs as well. >>>>> >>>>> Calculate! >>>>> Battery + motor efficiency, >>>>> (how much of the fed charge do you get back as drive) >>>>> and then, >>>>> how many nuclear power plants will be needed to charge >>>>> all electric vehicles. >>>> >>>>It takes about 15 to 20 kWh to power an average user scale >>>>electric/plugin >>>>vehicle for about 100 km. In the US, where the distance travelled for >>> >>> I doubt that, newer EV's will consume 100 to 200 Wh per mile or 6.3 to >>> 12.6 kWh per 100km. >> >>Yes, but the performances are very different than current US vehicles >>fleet >>(not >>I live there nor I'm interested in it), if you don't want to do an orange >>and apples comparison these are the right numbers indeed, it' s very >>difficult to >>go down to less than 15 kWh per 100 kWh and even something near 20 kWh per >>100 km is a more reasonable figure > > The BAU model is DEAD... Either our society will adapt to > smaller/lighter EV's or it will do without fully enclosed personal > transportation. That' s not a BAU model at all, what I support is at least a western European standard (where it's quite normal a vehicle has a fuel economy of 15 or 20 km per liter of petrol fuel, or 35-50 miles per gallon). For example the new tesla S (at a still very high price of about 50k $, but declining from the 100k $ of the first models) uses slightly more than 16 kWh per 100 km with a storage cell of 42 kWh and a range of about 250 km. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S Instead, with your kind of argument we could use only bikes at use no energy at all! On the other hand, we can evn achieve enormous energy savings with a efficient electrification of both personal and collective transportation (including goods) with tram, metros, trains, etc...and plugins and battery electric vehicles and home heating/conditioning with high performance electric heat pumps (including ground source geothermal ones, for colder climates)
From: J. Clarke on 29 May 2010 12:40 On 5/29/2010 11:38 AM, 7 wrote: > wrote: > >> On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:00:53 GMT, habshi(a)anony.net wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> photo on >>> >>> >>> http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/mira-ev-shatters-previous-record-by- > running-more-than-1000km-on-a-single-charge/ >>> Cant find youtube video >>> >>> Amazing stuff! Now wind and solar energy will supply all our transport >>> needs as well. >> >> Calculate! >> Battery + motor efficiency, >> (how much of the fed charge do you get back as drive) >> and then, >> how many nuclear power plants will be needed to charge >> all electric vehicles. > > > 80%+ of the power generated by a typical power station never reaches > the consumer. It goes towards heating the overhead cables. > Power companies don't want you or their politicians to know that. Learn to do arithmetic. <plonk>
From: J. Clarke on 29 May 2010 12:43 On 5/29/2010 11:32 AM, Tom wrote: > "T. Keating"<tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> wrote in message > news:5l2206t7h8cd8l1og97n5jumv5ecj6pvaa(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 29 May 2010 07:39:22 GMT, "Alex P."<alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> As for extended range, once enough EV's are on the road I expect our >> society will produce a small low drag trailer with extra cargo space >> and a small gas/diesel generator& fuel tank. I would not be >> surprised if we end up renting them out like U-haul trailers.. >> > > This is a cracking idea. > > This is such a good idea that if it'd have been my idea I would have kept > my mouth shut about it and touted it around the larger EV companies. Diesel > gennies can be pretty efficient run at a constant speed, but bloody annoying > to have to listen to. Having it in a trailer (perhaps with an automatic > start function) is definitely the right place to have it, and the ability to > hire it as and when needed would make good sense to the majority of people > who would only need the extra range a few times a year. Now there's a brilliant solution, burn diesel fuel in an inefficient generator in order to take a trip. Sorry, but if you can't drive it from NY to LA conveniently without having to have a trailer hitch installed and rent a generator trailer or drive 60 miles and spend the night while it recharges it's a niche product. People who can afford several cars might go for it but very few people will rely on such a thing for their primary transportation.
From: jimp on 29 May 2010 13:42 In sci.physics T. Keating <tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 07:39:22 GMT, "Alex P." <alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>"T. Keating" <tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> ha scritto nel messaggio >>news:6bi00619peocks03vfclnbhcopvld8uleg(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:16:48 GMT, "Alex P." <alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> soc newsgroups snipped in this reply.. >>> >>>> >>>>"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> ha scritto nel messaggio >>>>news:5n7sv5tumujj5jkts64098t8hgq5aq0uuv(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:00:53 GMT, habshi(a)anony.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>photo on >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/mira-ev-shatters-previous-record-by-running-more-than-1000km-on-a-single-charge/ >>>>>>Cant find youtube video >>>>>> >>>>>>Amazing stuff! Now wind and solar energy will supply all our transport >>>>>>needs as well. >>>>> >>>>> Calculate! >>>>> Battery + motor efficiency, >>>>> (how much of the fed charge do you get back as drive) >>>>> and then, >>>>> how many nuclear power plants will be needed to charge >>>>> all electric vehicles. >>>> >>>>It takes about 15 to 20 kWh to power an average user scale electric/plugin >>>>vehicle for about 100 km. In the US, where the distance travelled for >>> >>> I doubt that, newer EV's will consume 100 to 200 Wh per mile or 6.3 to >>> 12.6 kWh per 100km. >> >>Yes, but the performances are very different than current US vehicles fleet >>(not >>I live there nor I'm interested in it), if you don't want to do an orange >>and apples comparison these are the right numbers indeed, it' s very >>difficult to >>go down to less than 15 kWh per 100 kWh and even something near 20 kWh per >>100 km is a more reasonable figure > > The BAU model is DEAD... Either our society will adapt to > smaller/lighter EV's or it will do without fully enclosed personal > transportation. Yeah, in the rain and snow, sure people will go for that. > Peak Oil is upon us(NOW) and it's not going to get any better in the > future with depletion outstripping new discoveries/production. I've been hearing that for 4 decades now. > As for extended range, once enough EV's are on the road I expect our > society will produce a small low drag trailer with extra cargo space > and a small gas/diesel generator & fuel tank. I would not be > surprised if we end up renting them out like U-haul trailers.. For what? > I expect most long distance big rig trips will be outlawed/severly > restricted and/or become too expensive. Instead most container/cargo > trips will be replaced by electrified rail transportation with big > rigs used only for local deliveries. There goes all your fresh fruits and vegetables. >>>>personal transportation is more than 3 billions miles per year, >>> >>> Electric bikes are even better.. Less than 0.7 kWh per 100km. >>> Wayyy cheaper too.. >> >>That's right, but it's an other orange and apples comparison, the >>performaces of >>the two kinds of transportation are quite different. By the way that' s why >>I included the very efficient electrification of >>collective transportation > > Sorry, but that's the way it's going to be, The future will NOT be > BAU. Human society has reached a nexus point either we adapt and get > off fossil fuels or we die off relatively quickly. Oh the horror! Nonsense. >>>>http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/10febtvt/figure1.cfm >>>>they will need more than 900 TWh/year of electricity, or the total nuclear >>>>electricity US production. Pratically, personal electric vehicles are only >>>>*one possible* strategy to electrificate transportation (both of goods and >>>>people) and home heating/conditioning with efficient electric pumps >>> >>> A little conservation will go a long way.. >> >>Perfectly agree here >> >>> At least two thirds of the energy used to power Cable/Sat/DVR set-tops >>> (200mil+) is WASTED. On.. but nobody is >>> watching/listening/recording.. >> >>It's irrelevant, the total amount is very tiny in any industrial economy. >>Rather, there are huge potential of energy savings in the industrial sector, >>particurally in high efficiency electric motors plus inverters > > The real savings occur when we stop producing massive amounts of > material to support the fossil fuel industry. Solar panels, Wind > turbines, etc.. are nearly 100% recyclable with very little material > lost during their operational lifetimes.. . More simplistic nonsense. There are no "massive amounts of material to support the fossil fuel industry" being produced. Solar panel raw material is mostly sand and the trace amounts of other stuff aren't economical to reclaim. Nothing recycles without huge energy inputs. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.
From: jimp on 29 May 2010 13:45
In sci.physics J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote: > On 5/29/2010 11:32 AM, Tom wrote: >> "T. Keating"<tkusenet(a)ktcnslt.com> wrote in message >> news:5l2206t7h8cd8l1og97n5jumv5ecj6pvaa(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 29 May 2010 07:39:22 GMT, "Alex P."<alexp(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> As for extended range, once enough EV's are on the road I expect our >>> society will produce a small low drag trailer with extra cargo space >>> and a small gas/diesel generator& fuel tank. I would not be >>> surprised if we end up renting them out like U-haul trailers.. >>> >> >> This is a cracking idea. >> >> This is such a good idea that if it'd have been my idea I would have kept >> my mouth shut about it and touted it around the larger EV companies. Diesel >> gennies can be pretty efficient run at a constant speed, but bloody annoying >> to have to listen to. Having it in a trailer (perhaps with an automatic >> start function) is definitely the right place to have it, and the ability to >> hire it as and when needed would make good sense to the majority of people >> who would only need the extra range a few times a year. > > Now there's a brilliant solution, burn diesel fuel in an inefficient > generator in order to take a trip. > > Sorry, but if you can't drive it from NY to LA conveniently without > having to have a trailer hitch installed and rent a generator trailer or > drive 60 miles and spend the night while it recharges it's a niche > product. People who can afford several cars might go for it but very > few people will rely on such a thing for their primary transportation. Or even LA to San Diego. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |