EVs can't work, and are just stepping stones to banning all personal transportation

[acptulsa]

If we can't find common ground that EV's are more efficient (and agree about how much more efficient) then there is no reason to talk about how we get the pile of energy.

If we can't talk about energy distribution, we'll never find out if remote generation or on-board generation is more efficient. So, you preclude a step necessary to the process until the process is over.

You're right. Your plan will never work.

 

[GomerPile]

The problem is that you are not thinking about units of energy required to do work. The basis of any discussion on EV's need to be normalized into watt hours per unit of work. You can't possibly understand the subject of cant boil this down to the basics.

If we can't talk about energy distribution, we'll never find out if remote generation or on-board generation is more efficient. So, you preclude a step necessary to the process until the process is over.

You're right. Your plan will never work.

 

[CaptUSA]

The problem is that you are not thinking about units of energy required to do work. The basis of any discussion on EV's need to be normalized into watt hours per unit of work. You can't possibly understand the subject of cant boil this down to the basics.

No, the problem is that you are ignoring the units of work that are being done elsewhere by another generator. The ICE vehicle does two jobs - it transforms the fuel into useful energy, then propels the vehicle. The Electric Vehicle lets someone else do the first job, introduces a new job of storing the energy (that is unnecessary in the ICE vehicle), then propels the vehicle. And it takes more energy to move.

 

[Dr.3D]

One horsepower equals 746 watts.
Please use this information to show how many miles one can expect out of a battery verses a fuel tank.

 

[acptulsa]

The problem is that you are not thinking about units of energy required to do work. The basis of any discussion on EV's need to be normalized into watt hours per unit of work. You can't possibly understand the subject of cant boil this down to the basics.

One horsepower equals 746 watts.
Please use this information to show how many miles one can expect out of a battery verses a fuel tank.

There you go. The onus seems to be on you. This thread is full of people who know each other, and know what kind of grasp each other has on the entire process from raw ore full of energy to rubber rolling on the road. Let's see if you can even trace this energy you claim you can quantify back to the source.

You aren't talking to people who will blithely let you arbitrarily declare important parts of every equation off limits. We're more likely to just up and ask you out of the blue what American city this electric was named for:

 

[Dr.3D]

There you go. The onus seems to be on you. This thread is full of people who know each other, and know what kind of grasp each other has on the entire process from raw ore full of energy to rubber rolling on the road. Let's see if you can even trace this energy you claim you can quantify back to the source.

I'll bet the fuel tank weighs less than the equivalent battery for the same range in miles.

So how could something that weighs more be more efficient?

 

[acptulsa]

So how could something that weighs more be more efficient?

Unicorn farts. Buoyant as hydrogen.

 

[Dr.3D]

Unicorn farts. Buoyant as hydrogen.

The problem seems to be, how to find a sufficient supply of Unicorn farts.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

So how could something that weighs more be more efficient?

It all depends on how you define and compare things. I think as long as you describe your comparison correctly it's fine. Mischaracterising something, no thanks.

But I drive a diesel, my car is heavier than the equivalent gas car, but it consumes less fuel for the same distance. So I'm not entirely sure what the point is there.

Container ships are extremely heavy, but just about the most efficient way to move stuff. IIRC they use something in the order of 1/4 gallon of fuel to move a ton of material a thousand miles or so...

 

[Dr.3D]

It all depends on how you define and compare things. I think as long as you describe your comparison correctly it's fine. Mischaracterising something, no thanks.

But I drive a diesel, my car is heavier than the equivalent gas car, but it consumes less fuel for the same distance. So I'm not entirely sure what the point is there.

Container ships are extremely heavy, but just about the most efficient way to move stuff.

Okay, ya got me there, but how about charging time?

Which one takes longer to fill up? It's not all about efficiency.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

Okay, ya got me there, but how about charging time?

Which one takes longer to fill up? It's not all about efficiency.

If you stand and wait for it, the ICE car. But lets say my employer provides me with an electric car, which I can charge while I'm working. Provided I quit smoking, I would not have to stop at a gas station at least once a week.

 

[acptulsa]

If you stand and wait for it, the ICE car.

LOL you're as bad as Jim Nabors there.

A watched pot never boils. So, advantage EV because the pot takes so much longer to boil that no one can stand to watch it, making the ICE recharge slower because it's quick enough to stand and watch.

Makes as much sense as, the energy lost before I ever saw it don't count against my efficiency.

Yeah! Propaganda is fun!

 

[Dr.3D]

If you stand and wait for it, the ICE car. But lets say my employer provides me with an electric car, which I can charge while I'm working. Provided I quit smoking, I would not have to stop at a gas station at least once a week.

So really it's all about how you plan to use the vehicle. Personal circumstances and all.

Some will want ICE and others will want electric vehicles.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

LOL you're as bad as Jim Nabors there.

A watched pot never boils. So, advantage EV because the pot takes so much longer to boil that no one can stand to watch it, making the ICE recharge slower because it's quick enough to stand and watch.

Makes as much sense as, the energy lost before I ever saw it don't count against my efficiency.

Yeah! Propaganda is fun!

Lets just say I like to have interesting discussions. Of course it takes less time to fill up an ICE car.

So really it's all about how you plan to use the vehicle. Personal circumstances and all.

Some will want ICE and others will want electric vehicles.

This is my point. If your car charges while you are at work, you don't experience the waiting for it. It's all very marginal to begin with and when you're a smoker you're likely to stop at a gas station anyway... But the same with the A/C on board you can run while the vehicle is parked, if you have it, you probably use it. This makes a vehicle use more energy than it otherwise would. But it's a lifestyle choice, not necessarily related to the EV technology itself but a consequence thereof.

 

[acptulsa]

... and when you're a smoker you're likely to stop at a gas station anyway.

Got to give credit to you Continentals, and your devil may care attitude. Gas stations are among the few places I have never been a smoker.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Tesla bills customer $21000 for driving through the rain while they're still in warranty

 

[GomerPile]

You think you have a grasp on the topic but there are large gaps in your thinking. Within those gaps lie important points that you should understand but refuse to discuss.

There you go. The onus seems to be on you. This thread is full of people who know each other, and know what kind of grasp each other has on the entire process from raw ore full of energy to rubber rolling on the road. Let's see if you can even trace this energy you claim you can quantify back to the source.

You aren't talking to people who will blithely let you arbitrarily declare important parts of every equation off limits. We're more likely to just up and ask you out of the blue what American city this electric was named for:

 

[GomerPile]

PERFECT!

The issue with this example is that we "magically" made 34kwh appear for the Tesla...it had to come from somewhere.

I choose to take 3 cubic meters of natural gas with the energy equivalent of 34kwh and power a gas turbine someplace. The gas turbine has an efficiency of 50%. The power lines to the Tesla charger are only 90% efficient. There are dozens of methods to make electricity but this one is 40% of US production so lets use it.

34KWH ---> GAS_TURBINE ----> 17KWH -----> POWER LINES = 15.3KWH

My tesla will travel 61.2 mikes on that 15.3 KWH of electricity.


[IS THIS A FAIR EXAMPLE?]
We have a gallon of gas with 34kwh of energy in the Camary AND 34KWH of natural gas processed into my Tesla thru the grid. The gas car goes 32 miles, and the Tesla goes 61.2 miles (roughly 2X the efficiency).

I get the argument about fuel or energy. However I also understand what Gomer is saying.

There's nothing wrong with the statement that (provided the numbers are good, I did not check);

1L gas - Camry 23mi (on average)

34kWh - Tesla does 122mi (on average)

Let me know if you agree so far.

When you start to say that the electric car is more efficient despite the higher weight, I think it opens it up to more external factors, such as the production, transportation and storage of the energy involved.

 

[CaptUSA]

PERFECT!

The issue with this example is that we "magically" made 34kwh appear for the Tesla...it had to come from somewhere.

Ugh... So many things wrong.....

First... 3 cubic meters=

vs. 1 gal=

Yay! Efficiency!!

How about looking at how many cubic meters of sun you'd need to equal a single gallon of gas? (which, BTW, is about 45% of crude - the other 55% being used for other useful applications)

Secondly, anyone who has used a flashlight knows that fully charged batteries provide more power than half discharged batteries. The greater the differential between the plates, the greater the power flow. Earlier in this thread, (which you still refuse to read), we talked about how Tesla has completely overstated their ranges.

Thirdly, you use 10% for line loss, but don't account for X-former loss, inverter losses while charging, nor battery drain over time.

I could go on...

You started here:

+ The opportunity for EV's lies in this region between ~25% ICE efficiency and ~90% EV efficiency. 3.6X efficiency

Now you're here:

The gas car goes 32 miles, and the Tesla goes 61.2 miles (roughly 2X the efficiency).

Keep going and you may finally come to the real answer. Or....... You could just read through the thread.

 

[GomerPile]

Hey Einstein....gasoline is a liquid, natural gas is well...a gas. 1 gallon of gas = 3 cubic meters of NG if you work out the energy content.

Grid electricity is not generated using gasoline....but you're the expert.

Ugh... So many things wrong.....

First... 3 cubic meters=

vs. 1 gal=

Earlier in this thread, (which you still refuse to read), we talked about how Tesla has completely overstated their ranges.

As a Tesla owner, I can tell you for sure that the range Tesla quotes is spot on. I track it constantly.