Tesla semi

[houstonscott]

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/09/ferrari-ceo-says-electric-cars-may-not-be-as-clean-as-they-seem.html

 

[daugen]

I don't think anyone thinks we are getting out of diesel any time soon.
We are just spectators in a way, as the manufacturers take some chances and and plenty of their money which they have earned huge amounts of over the last few years of a strong economy. I think at some point electric motors and even batteries(further out) will have a weight advantage, though until they find a substitute for heavy copper in windings big electric motors are certainly not light.

Wouldn't it make sense for a utility to start electrifying their trucks first? As long as a business case can be made, versus using LP for power as an alternative, as well as diesel, the utility ought to be able to "buy" its power pretty reasonably.

Cordless tool motors are up to almost 100V now. Higher voltage requires less stepping down, and my understanding is more efficient, though with handling risks. So I wonder if there will be a steadily escalating voltage used in transportation batteries, and if so, where will it end?
Will the/does the DOT regulate voltage used in vehicles?

 

[daugen]

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/09/ferrari-ceo-says-electric-cars-may-not-be-as-clean-as-they-seem.html

I'm sure he has some good points, but as a car guy HS, you likely also know FCA is way behind all the other major players in electrification and advanced safety technology. Since he has nothing good to offer, I can see Marchionne downplaying others that are eating his lunch. In other words, maybe a little marketing disinformation at play.

It's all about the green here, either money or ecology. I think we should question authority when numbers are spouted to justify positions.
If the whole premise is based on bad data, say someone didn't add up the total carbon footprint, or whatever measure you want to use, for electrical generation. Burning coal to make electricity to power transportation sure doesn't make ecological sense to me, but it sure might make financial sense. Big Coal may be dying but it's not dead yet. So much of our electricity is still generated by coal. Modern stack scrubbers have made a big difference, while I'm not sure much progress has been made with nuclear waste disposal.

I'm holding out for fusion. Hopefully in the next 20 years we'll see something that is not science fiction.

 

[Snobdds]

Electric vehicles don't cut the pollution, they simply move the pollution around.

 

[daugen]

VW Planning Fleet of Electric Buses, Trucks - Motor Trend

 

[California]

Electric vehicles don't cut the pollution, they simply move the pollution around.

That's not a negative. Moving a major pollution source far from population centers is a major plus for public health; far fewer city children growing up with respiratory damage.

 

[houstonscott]

That's not a negative. Moving a major pollution source far from population centers is a major plus for public health; far fewer city children growing up with respiratory damage.

I agree.

 

[4570Man]

Just running a couple numbers through google it would appear electric is less efficient than diesel.
Diesel engine 45% efficiency.
Electric motor better than 90% efficient.
Nuclear power plant 33% percent efficient. And yes I know there's a lot of variables left out.

 

[vvanders]

Yeah, you're missing a few things. If you want to go generation to tailpipe then you also have to factor in that refining a gallon of gas is about 6kWh, not sure for the numbers on diesel.

Also there's hydro/solar which are pretty darn cheap these days. I can get 1kWh @ $0.06 which will beat any equivalent diesel in terms of actual cost per mile.

Right now with current diesel prices($3/gal) I get the equivalent of 132 MPG and that's in addition to the fact that I don't have have the overhead of oil change every ~3k miles.

 

[Snobdds]

The grid could not handle the added load of ev's. Wind and solar don't produce a lot at night when the demand would Spike, therefore the more dirty fuels would be needed to keep producing energy.

Battery powered Ev's I don't think work yet, the range and the lack of infrastructure are prohibited. I don't see any rush by energy companies to add capacity or even modernise. Toyota is all in on hydrogen fuel cells. That makes more sense as range is back to American standards. Plus it's easier and cheaper to have the infrastructure build up for hydrogen.

Time will tell what energy source will prevail. However internal combustion will still be around in all our lifetimes.



T

 

[dragoneggs]

Time will tell what energy source will prevail. However internal combustion will still be around in all our lifetimes.

Shoot... I was hoping for a leap in technology would come along for a power source to replace my heart and I would be around when ICE were no longer. :laughing:

 

[Redneck in training]

Electric vehicles don't cut the pollution, they simply move the pollution around.

Do the math. Electric cars polute 4 to 5 times less. Typical ICE car uses about 5% of the energy contained in the hydrocarbon when it was still underground. Electric cars use at least 20-25%. or way less if powered from wind or solar.

 

[Redneck in training]

The grid could not handle the added load of ev's. Wind and solar don't produce a lot at night when the demand would Spike, therefore the more dirty fuels would be needed to keep producing energy.

Battery powered Ev's I don't think work yet, the range and the lack of infrastructure are prohibited. I don't see any rush by energy companies to add capacity or even modernise. Toyota is all in on hydrogen fuel cells. That makes more sense as range is back to American standards. Plus it's easier and cheaper to have the infrastructure build up for hydrogen.

Time will tell what energy source will prevail. However internal combustion will still be around in all our lifetimes.



T

In fact the power companies are seeing electric cars as a savier for the coal plants. There is generating overcaoacity every night. The bigger is the unit the longer is its time constant (The rate at which the power can be increasedor decreased.) Batteries have very short time constant (miliseconds), water turbines (minutes), gas turbines (fraction of hour), combine cycle (hours), coal (days).
Another thing is the load from electric cars (provided there will be enough of them) will be more or less distributed a sopposed to localized.

 

[dragoneggs]

Do the math. Electric cars polute 4 to 5 times less. Typical ICE car uses about 5% of the energy contained in the hydrocarbon when it was still underground. Electric cars use at least 20-25%. or way less if powered from wind or solar.

Are you figuring only the operating energy cost or production cost as well?

 

[daugen]

Toyota is all in on hydrogen fuel cells. That makes more sense as range is back to American standards. Plus it's easier and cheaper to have the infrastructure build up for hydrogen.

doesn't hydrogen have some performance downside like less energy output?
I have seen the hydrogen Toyota cars in magazines but I think they are kept in California and a few test areas.
Why do you see hydrogen as better? Certainly refilling would be easier/faster than waiting for a supercharger.
Can current service stations add hydrogen without ripping up the whole place?

 

[Redneck in training]

Are you figuring only the operating energy cost or production cost as well?

Everything. I assumed the production of the e car is about the same as ICE and getting the hydrocarbon out of ground uses about the same amount of energy. Efficiency of the ICE engine is about 20% at best while efficiency of the electric motor and battery charging discharging cycle is about 90%. Combine cycle power plants are about 60% efficient while some are pushing 70%. Refinery is about 20-25% efficient. Thus ICE uses about 5% of the energy of the original hydrocarbon and e car uses at least 20%. Assuming pollution is proportional to fuel consumption ecar pollutes at least 5 times less than ICE car.
Moreover the ecars are quiet, have great acceleration, their brakes last forever, have no oil changes ever and with proper charging software can stabilize the grid. In example they could keep coal plants running at efficient level and without a penalty for excessive production.

 

[houstonscott]

Toyota is all in on hydrogen fuel cells. That makes more sense as range is back to American standards. Plus it's easier and cheaper to have the infrastructure build up for hydrogen. doesn't hydrogen have some performance downside like less energy output? I have seen the hydrogen Toyota cars in magazines but I think they are kept in California and a few test areas. Why do you see hydrogen as better? Certainly refilling would be easier/faster than waiting for a supercharger. Can current service stations add hydrogen without ripping up the whole place?

Best fuel for a hydrogen car is diesel.

 

[Egon]

Best fuel for a hydrogen car is diesel.

Hydrogen fuel cells may be a viable option with some already being used.

 

[Snobdds]

So I had to go to Jackson Hole Wyoming and Yellowstone this summer and this sight caught my attention. Electric cars, mostly from California, having to either be rescued or provide their own energy for charging up their car. The hotels in Jackson had signs that said they have no facilities to charge EV and they should not take them to Yellowstone because they too do not have charging facilities. That did not stop people, they just had a Honda generator and 5 gallons of gas that they would chain to their rim and charge their cars with. It was the funniest thing I ever saw, and carrying around a jug of gas kinda defeats the purpose of EV. But it shows just how much infrastructure would be needed for EV to be viable on a large scale. I do not think the park service in Yellowstone would build out huge parking lots with charging stations at each spot.

Now Toyota has discovered the EV is great in concept, but their success would be dependent upon power companies producing cheap power, distribution companies building out the grid, and local business like hotels providing charging stations for their clients, not to mention cities proving stations on street sides. It would be a massive investment on a lot of levels. The thing that makes the internal combustion engine so workable is the ability to have a centrally located gas stations that can serve thousands of people fast and efficiently with a fuel source. EV would go away from a central location to individual stations. Toyota knows the best approach is to be able to stick with a central location distribution system, where a hydrogen tank could be located next to gas and diesel. No need to reinvent the wheel, just refine it...don't forget Toyota started the hybrid thing with the Prius. If the EV was workable, Toyota would have already been on it.

The EV is great if you don't ever leave a radius of your house where you know 100% you could recharge every night. Hydrogen fuel cells make the most sense, no grid updates and the range is limited by the size of the tank. Plus it would be far cheaper to just add a hydrogen tank to a gas station than add charging stations everywhere. Musk is doing good things to further technology, but I don't see EV as the future of transportation.

 

[houstonscott]

So I had to go to Jackson Hole Wyoming and Yellowstone this summer and this sight caught my attention. Electric cars, mostly from California, having to either be rescued or provide their own energy for charging up their car. The hotels in Jackson had signs that said they have no facilities to charge EV and they should not take them to Yellowstone because they too do not have charging facilities. That did not stop people, they just had a Honda generator and 5 gallons of gas that they would chain to their rim and charge their cars with. It was the funniest thing I ever saw, and carrying around a jug of gas kinda defeats the purpose of EV. But it shows just how much infrastructure would be needed for EV to be viable on a large scale. I do not think the park service in Yellowstone would build out huge parking lots with charging stations at each spot. Now Toyota has discovered the EV is great in concept, but their success would be dependent upon power companies producing cheap power, distribution companies building out the grid, and local business like hotels providing charging stations for their clients, not to mention cities proving stations on street sides. It would be a massive investment on a lot of levels. The thing that makes the internal combustion engine so workable is the ability to have a centrally located gas stations that can serve thousands of people fast and efficiently with a fuel source. EV would go away from a central location to individual stations. Toyota knows the best approach is to be able to stick with a central location distribution system, where a hydrogen tank could be located next to gas and diesel. No need to reinvent the wheel, just refine it...don't forget Toyota started the hybrid thing with the Prius. If the EV was workable, Toyota would have already been on it. The EV is great if you don't ever leave a radius of your house where you know 100% you could recharge every night. Hydrogen fuel cells make the most sense, no grid updates and the range is limited by the size of the tank. Plus it would be far cheaper to just add a hydrogen tank to a gas station than add charging stations everywhere. Musk is doing good things to further technology, but I don't see EV as the future of transportation.

Pictures worth 1000 words.