The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 29 Jul 2007 11:43 default wrote: > Tesla Roadster has a range of 250 miles and recharge time of 12 hours. > That is more than ample for most commutes. It's price is very ample too. Consider the impact on the environment of scrapping/recycling all those batteries every few years as well. Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jul 2007 11:46 "J.A. Legris" wrote: > The one real contribution I've made is having no kids, whose benefits will grow > exponentially as each successive generation of my non-existent heirs > produce no offspring. I'm sure the presumably negative effect on the average IQ will be something the greens will be very happy about. Idiots are easier for them to brainwash. Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jul 2007 11:51 MooseFET wrote: > Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote: > > Martin Griffith wrote: > > >If they could recharge in 10 mins, the US power grid would burn out > > > > To a first aproximation, given a large number of electric cars > > on a power grid, the load on the power grid is almost the same > > whether they recharge in ten minutes or ten hours. In the > > later case, you have 60 times as many cars being recharged at > > any given time, each of which is drawing 1/60th as much power. > > > > Short recharge times would, however, have a large effect on the > > time of day that the charging would take place. At ten hours > > everyone will plug in when they get home. At ten minutes a > > large number will try to recharge in the morning right before > > leaving for work. And the grid has to be sized for peak load, > > not average load... > > At 2 seconds, people will recharge it just before they set out. At > ten minutes, they will plug the charger in when they get how. Nobody > wants to wait an extra ten minutes before they start on their hour > long commute. > > > Either way, I don't see the total capacity of the current power > > grid being enough. Household nuclear reactors, anyone? :) > > The owners will get a better deal on the power if they let the power > company control the charging current. The feature will be built into > the charger and most people will use it. That's a very sensible idea actually. The recharging rate could be dynamically modulated to provide a full charge quite quickly whilst at the same time minimising peak load on the grid (and obtaining optimal use of spare capacity) . That'll keep the power generators very happy indeed. Plus, you're presumably get a discount for plugging it in earlier rather than later. That might provide the required incentive to do that. I'd patent it FAST. Graham
From: Guy Macon on 29 Jul 2007 12:11 J.A. Legris wrote: >Al Gore's individual consumption is irrelevant if he can motivate >large numbers of people to reduce theirs. He's making a significant >contribution to the effort. What's yours? I increased the battery life of a toy from 15 hours to 25 hours. It used 2 AAA batteries, and we sold around 3 million of them. I also decreased the weight of every Boeing 777 aircraft by 5 ounces, thus reducing fuel consumption by a tiny amount per mile that will be multiplied by a large number of miles before the last one is retired from service. And yours? -- Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/>
From: Eeyore on 29 Jul 2007 12:36
"J.A. Legris" wrote: > Al Gore's individual consumption is irrelevant if he can motivate > large numbers of people to reduce theirs. He's making a significant > contribution to the effort. What's yours? Aaaarrrgghh ! It turns out that CO2 isn't a problem. Expect the IPCC's extravagant and extraordinary lies to be revealed in ever more gory detail over the next year or two. Al Gore is merely making a significant contribution to lining his own pocket. He runs a company providing carbon offsets/credits. He profits from 'green gesturing'. > But these too are just band-aid solutions No 'solution' is needed. Although reducing use of oil to conserve supplies for reasons of long-term energy security might be a smart move. Graham |