|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 2, 2024 8:37:35 GMT
You have completely wandered away from the point of conversation. If EV cars were capable of out-competing ICE on functionality and convenience, then ICE would be supplanted naturally and no ban would be 'needed'. The conversation came from you attempting to pretend that there is something wrong with this reasoning. There is another aspect to this that rarely gets discussed.
Although Peak Oil has gone out of fashion somewhat there is still the awkward problem that the longer Western countries postpone the beginning of the time when when they start to wean them themselves off their dependency on imported oil and gas the longer they will be obliged to kow-tow to unsavoury regimes like the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia. Not to mention Russia.
I don't think the argument that the urban masses in the West (or Afro-Asia for that matter) will not be able to afford means of personal transportation based on renewable energy sources eg electricity is a good reason to delay making the transition.
Agreed. But the fact that the govt's chosen replacement for ICE cars simply isn't ready to work as a general means of transport IS a good reason to delay making the transition. It's not just a matter of "tough luck, poor people, you'll have to take public transport". It was the availability of affordable personal transport for the masses that made the West so prosperous. If people become less mobile it will be a big hit to GDP and productivity. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Feb 2, 2024 8:38:36 GMT
There is another aspect to this that rarely gets discussed.
Although Peak Oil has gone out of fashion somewhat there is still the awkward problem that the longer Western countries postpone the beginning of the time when when they start to wean them themselves off their dependency on imported oil and gas the longer they will be obliged to kow-tow to unsavoury regimes like the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia. Not to mention Russia.
I don't think the argument that the urban masses in the West (or Afro-Asia for that matter) will not be able to afford means of personal transportation based on renewable energy sources eg electricity is a good reason to delay making the transition.
Let them eat cake, as the saying goes. Or at least let them take the tram.
Petrol automobiles are just one slice of a massive dependency knot. If we were to tackle this huge dependency problem rationally, we wouldn't to choose start with a change very likely to create massive inconvenience and reduce our standard of living. We would start somewhere else - so where is this start visible? The conversation was about the relative functionality of the two technologies and only arose because of the claim that BEV's were functionally equal or superior to ICE automobiles (which they are clearly not). If someone, like you have, argues that the change to a functionally inferior technology is needed strategically then that's a different kind of argument. You're correct in highlighting that fuel for ICEs based on hydrocarbons is just one aspect of a massive and debilitating dependency on sources of energy supply we could well be rid of, but the argument to cut the knot is more rationally based on geo-strategic grounds than functional utility. The latter is the argument the Chinese use to continue with (and expand) their carbon-based economy although even they appear to be starting to recognise the dangers in remaining petroleum-dependent. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 2, 2024 23:16:21 GMT
I am trying to understand the reasoning of you and others that think transferring the motive power of cars and vans from ICE to electric motors will be so bad.
I can only surmise it's similar mindsets to those that kept the railways using steam well into the sixties, with the result Britain lost skills in the rail sector that it's still not regained...
You do seem to have a problem with "understanding" in general. I've told you exactly why BEVs will NEVER replace ICE cars - because the time taken to recharge them will never be fast enough to make them practical. There are many other reasons why they will never take over - like the environmental damage done by battery manufacture, the excessive weight of the cars, the huge cost of upgrading National grids, the huge cost of providing hundreds of thousands of charging points etc etc - but it's their fundamental impracticality that makes them unviable for so many people. And that will never change. But "electric" cars certainly are the future - but NOT battery powered. Hydrogen Fuel Cell is the obvious solution because it can match most of the practicality of fossil fuels with none of the pollution. Toyota already have HFC cars that can do 400 miles on a fill-up and be refuelled in 3 minutes for about the same price as an equivalent BEV. In fact Toyota have only recently begun making BEVs - they thought that HFC would be the obvious replacement for Petrol/diesel. BEVs are a dead end, while hybrids are just a stop-gap. Hybrids are by far the most polluting cars on our roads. That's why they're being banned. In fact HFCs are extremely green, unlike BEVs, because they clean the air as they drive along. The HFC requires the air it uses to be very clean so it filters it and returns clean air and water (pure enough to drink). Also, unlike BEVs, they don't generate vast amounts of rubber pollution (because they're much lighter than BEVs) - and rubber pollution is becoming one of the most dangerous pollutants, now that fossil fuel emission pollutants have been eliminated. There are battery technologies now that you can charge in seconds. You can not say the charging time will always be the problem. I think we could get it down to 5 minutes, which is about as long as it used to take when you filled up, paid the cashier and drove off. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 2, 2024 23:41:33 GMT
You do seem to have a problem with "understanding" in general. I've told you exactly why BEVs will NEVER replace ICE cars - because the time taken to recharge them will never be fast enough to make them practical. There are many other reasons why they will never take over - like the environmental damage done by battery manufacture, the excessive weight of the cars, the huge cost of upgrading National grids, the huge cost of providing hundreds of thousands of charging points etc etc - but it's their fundamental impracticality that makes them unviable for so many people. And that will never change. But "electric" cars certainly are the future - but NOT battery powered. Hydrogen Fuel Cell is the obvious solution because it can match most of the practicality of fossil fuels with none of the pollution. Toyota already have HFC cars that can do 400 miles on a fill-up and be refuelled in 3 minutes for about the same price as an equivalent BEV. In fact Toyota have only recently begun making BEVs - they thought that HFC would be the obvious replacement for Petrol/diesel. BEVs are a dead end, while hybrids are just a stop-gap. Hybrids are by far the most polluting cars on our roads. That's why they're being banned. In fact HFCs are extremely green, unlike BEVs, because they clean the air as they drive along. The HFC requires the air it uses to be very clean so it filters it and returns clean air and water (pure enough to drink). Also, unlike BEVs, they don't generate vast amounts of rubber pollution (because they're much lighter than BEVs) - and rubber pollution is becoming one of the most dangerous pollutants, now that fossil fuel emission pollutants have been eliminated. There are battery technologies now that you can charge in seconds. You can not say the charging time will always be the problem. I think we could get it down to 5 minutes, which is about as long as it used to take when you filled up, paid the cashier and drove off. Jeez .What amount of amperage would that draw ? |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 3, 2024 0:31:48 GMT
There are battery technologies now that you can charge in seconds. You can not say the charging time will always be the problem. I think we could get it down to 5 minutes, which is about as long as it used to take when you filled up, paid the cashier and drove off. Jeez .What amount of amperage would that draw ? A huge amount if it were a car. It was something the Japs came up with and they had it in mind for mobiles. It would charge a mobile battery up in about one second. That's seeing what it can do in a lab though. The world's fastest chargers today are the Huawei ones which are 600kW, so 600A at 1000v. They will charge at a rate of 1 km of range every second, so 5 minutes is 300km range. This is crucial because if EVs go mainstream all the motorway garages need fast charging so they can cope with the throughput of traffic on the site they have. It also makes it economic in terms of charging costs. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 3, 2024 0:44:18 GMT
Jeez .What amount of amperage would that draw ? A huge amount if it were a car. It was something the Japs came up with and they had it in mind for mobiles. It would charge a mobile battery up in about one second. That's seeing what it can do in a lab though. The world's fastest chargers today are the Huawei ones which are 600kW, so 600A at 1000v. They will charge at a rate of 1 km of range every second, so 5 minutes is 300km range. This is crucial because if EVs go mainstream all the motorway garages need fast charging so they can cope with the throughput of traffic on the site they have. It also makes it economic in terms of charging costs. Interesting 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 3, 2024 7:42:11 GMT
Jeez .What amount of amperage would that draw ? A huge amount if it were a car. It was something the Japs came up with and they had it in mind for mobiles. It would charge a mobile battery up in about one second. That's seeing what it can do in a lab though. The world's fastest chargers today are the Huawei ones which are 600kW, so 600A at 1000v. They will charge at a rate of 1 km of range every second, so 5 minutes is 300km range. This is crucial because if EVs go mainstream all the motorway garages need fast charging so they can cope with the throughput of traffic on the site they have. It also makes it economic in terms of charging costs. So a motorway service station with say 20 pumps will need a 12MW power connection to the grid (even small petrol stations in towns can have 10 pumps) . So you are talking about massive upgrades to power supplies to each and every petrol station in the country - all at eye watering costs. Electrification is not going to be cheap or economical. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 3, 2024 7:46:25 GMT
Good article in todays paper about the massive failures in government directed investment that the switch to EV's are causing. But one of the comments stood out quite well:  Imagine we lived in a world where all cars were EVs, and then along comes a new invention, the “Internal Combustion Engine”!
Think how well they would sell: A vehicle half the weight, half the price that will almost quarter the damage done to the road. A vehicle that can be refuelled in 1/10th of the time and has a range of up to 4 times the distance in all weather conditions. It does not rely on the environmentally damaging use of non-renewable rare earth elements to power it, and uses far less steel and other materials.
Just think how excited people would be for such technology, it would sell like hot cakes!
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 3, 2024 9:07:18 GMT
You do seem to have a problem with "understanding" in general. I've told you exactly why BEVs will NEVER replace ICE cars - because the time taken to recharge them will never be fast enough to make them practical. There are many other reasons why they will never take over - like the environmental damage done by battery manufacture, the excessive weight of the cars, the huge cost of upgrading National grids, the huge cost of providing hundreds of thousands of charging points etc etc - but it's their fundamental impracticality that makes them unviable for so many people. And that will never change. But "electric" cars certainly are the future - but NOT battery powered. Hydrogen Fuel Cell is the obvious solution because it can match most of the practicality of fossil fuels with none of the pollution. Toyota already have HFC cars that can do 400 miles on a fill-up and be refuelled in 3 minutes for about the same price as an equivalent BEV. In fact Toyota have only recently begun making BEVs - they thought that HFC would be the obvious replacement for Petrol/diesel. BEVs are a dead end, while hybrids are just a stop-gap. Hybrids are by far the most polluting cars on our roads. That's why they're being banned. In fact HFCs are extremely green, unlike BEVs, because they clean the air as they drive along. The HFC requires the air it uses to be very clean so it filters it and returns clean air and water (pure enough to drink). Also, unlike BEVs, they don't generate vast amounts of rubber pollution (because they're much lighter than BEVs) - and rubber pollution is becoming one of the most dangerous pollutants, now that fossil fuel emission pollutants have been eliminated. There are battery technologies now that you can charge in seconds. You can not say the charging time will always be the problem. I think we could get it down to 5 minutes, which is about as long as it used to take when you filled up, paid the cashier and drove off. What technology is that? Are you referring to capacitors? If so they're very different technologies, as you should know. I've got a Seiko kinetic watch which uses a capacitor (not a rechargeable battery). It's "recharged" by either movement (which takes a long time) or can be recharged by static electricity (via a very expensive device) extremely quickly (seconds). Seiko abandoned the technology because it was too unreliable and went back to rechargeable batteries which are slow to recharge - and any attempt to recharge them fast causes rapid degradation of their structure. Reversible reactions NEVER reverse accurately and the faster you charge them the faster they degrade. Capacitors are not suitable for EVs for many reasons and no manufacturer has ever put one into production. But the trouble is BvL you keep on reading stuff about what can theoretically be done in labs but you don't understand that these technologies cannot be translated into workable production models, sometimes because of inherent problems. For example there is NO way that the National Grid could EVER by upgraded to deliver the kind of currents required to support fast charge rates that can begin to compete with the transfer of petrol to car. As I've said before even the few charging stations that use the 150kW chargers have to back them up with on-site batteries to fill in for when the National Grid can't deliver the power. If you try to supply these chargers from the Grid you get less than 100kW. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 3, 2024 12:54:13 GMT
A huge amount if it were a car. It was something the Japs came up with and they had it in mind for mobiles. It would charge a mobile battery up in about one second. That's seeing what it can do in a lab though. The world's fastest chargers today are the Huawei ones which are 600kW, so 600A at 1000v. They will charge at a rate of 1 km of range every second, so 5 minutes is 300km range. This is crucial because if EVs go mainstream all the motorway garages need fast charging so they can cope with the throughput of traffic on the site they have. It also makes it economic in terms of charging costs. So a motorway service station with say 20 pumps will need a 12MW power connection to the grid (even small petrol stations in towns can have 10 pumps) . So you are talking about massive upgrades to power supplies to each and every petrol station in the country - all at eye watering costs. Electrification is not going to be cheap or economical. Yes indeed, the grid is yet one more infrastructure that needs major work on it. Also the sewerage system is under-invested in as well. The trouble is this country is far less intelligent now than when it built these things the first time around, hence the huge cost.
However, if we standardise on electricity as our means of transporting and using energy then we only need one distribution system instead of three (oil, gas, and leccy) . Sending energy down wires is a lot less work than driving tanker trucks. Long-term the new system is more efficient. Our problem is too much crap legacy technology, much from Victorian times. I suggest we study and learn Chinese business techniques. They can build stuff far faster than we can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 3, 2024 13:16:40 GMT
There are battery technologies now that you can charge in seconds. You can not say the charging time will always be the problem. I think we could get it down to 5 minutes, which is about as long as it used to take when you filled up, paid the cashier and drove off. What technology is that? Are you referring to capacitors? If so they're very different technologies, as you should know. I've got a Seiko kinetic watch which uses a capacitor (not a rechargeable battery). It's "recharged" by either movement (which takes a long time) or can be recharged by static electricity (via a very expensive device) extremely quickly (seconds). Seiko abandoned the technology because it was too unreliable and went back to rechargeable batteries which are slow to recharge - and any attempt to recharge them fast causes rapid degradation of their structure. Reversible reactions NEVER reverse accurately and the faster you charge them the faster they degrade. Capacitors are not suitable for EVs for many reasons and no manufacturer has ever put one into production. But the trouble is BvL you keep on reading stuff about what can theoretically be done in labs but you don't understand that these technologies cannot be translated into workable production models, sometimes because of inherent problems. For example there is NO way that the National Grid could EVER by upgraded to deliver the kind of currents required to support fast charge rates that can begin to compete with the transfer of petrol to car. As I've said before even the few charging stations that use the 150kW chargers have to back them up with on-site batteries to fill in for when the National Grid can't deliver the power. If you try to supply these chargers from the Grid you get less than 100kW. 100 000 600kw chargers are scheduled to be installed across China in 2024. CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes. The technology is already in production. We had better sort our fuckwits out because it seems the UK can't do a bloody thing, be it nuclear power, HS rail, sewerage, postal services and all the rest of it. The cunts can't even fix potholes in roads. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 3, 2024 13:51:56 GMT
What technology is that? Are you referring to capacitors? If so they're very different technologies, as you should know. I've got a Seiko kinetic watch which uses a capacitor (not a rechargeable battery). It's "recharged" by either movement (which takes a long time) or can be recharged by static electricity (via a very expensive device) extremely quickly (seconds). Seiko abandoned the technology because it was too unreliable and went back to rechargeable batteries which are slow to recharge - and any attempt to recharge them fast causes rapid degradation of their structure. Reversible reactions NEVER reverse accurately and the faster you charge them the faster they degrade. Capacitors are not suitable for EVs for many reasons and no manufacturer has ever put one into production. But the trouble is BvL you keep on reading stuff about what can theoretically be done in labs but you don't understand that these technologies cannot be translated into workable production models, sometimes because of inherent problems. For example there is NO way that the National Grid could EVER by upgraded to deliver the kind of currents required to support fast charge rates that can begin to compete with the transfer of petrol to car. As I've said before even the few charging stations that use the 150kW chargers have to back them up with on-site batteries to fill in for when the National Grid can't deliver the power. If you try to supply these chargers from the Grid you get less than 100kW. 100 000 600kw chargers are scheduled to be installed across China in 2024. CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes. The technology is already in production. We had better sort our fuckwits out because it seems the UK can't do a bloody thing, be it nuclear power, HS rail, sewerage, postal services and all the rest of it. The cunts can't even fix potholes in roads. Bollocks. You're either very gullible or a liar - probably both. Most of what you say is simply not true - and when challenged you can't give credible links. And your obsession with China is getting boring. You'll be telling us that they have working versions of fusion energy next.  Tell me when they're got any of these technologies working. As for 600kW chargers don't make me laugh. And CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes - if they're about 5kWh. The only significant advantage I can see is that they claim they don't catch fire. Whoopee. I bet they do though. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 3, 2024 13:58:36 GMT
100 000 600kw chargers are scheduled to be installed across China in 2024. CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes. The technology is already in production. We had better sort our fuckwits out because it seems the UK can't do a bloody thing, be it nuclear power, HS rail, sewerage, postal services and all the rest of it. The cunts can't even fix potholes in roads. Bollocks. You're either very gullible or a liar - probably both. Most of what you say is simply not true - and when challenged you can't give credible links. And your obsession with China is getting boring. You'll be telling us that they have working versions of fusion energy next. Tell me when they're got any of these technologies working. As for 600kW chargers don't make me laugh. And CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes - if they're about 5kWh. The only significant advantage I can see is that they claim they don't catch fire. Whoopee. I bet they do though. These are them. Please don't accuse me of being a liar out of your own laziness in checking the facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 3, 2024 14:09:27 GMT
Jeez you are thick. Anyone can build a super powerful charger. But where does it get its power from. Duh. And how much do the batteries cost that can accept this charge rate - and how long do they last.
At the moment the UK can't even support a network of 7kW changers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 3, 2024 14:19:48 GMT
Jeez you are thick. Anyone can build a super powerful charger. But where does it get its power from. Duh. And how much do the batteries cost that can accept this charge rate - and how long do they last. At the moment the UK can't even support a network of 7kW changers. First question:
455GW of new solar.
second question:
Don't know, but I do know they are the standard ones they are now doing and will be in many cars. CATL provide the whole subframe with battery box being the structural strength of the car and comes with all electronics, motor and drive, so the other manufacturers just build the body on top.
Third question
yes
Batteries can do up to 6000 charge cycles depending on how they are used.
|
|
Tell me when they're got any of these technologies working. As for 600kW chargers don't make me laugh. And CATL batteries can be charged in 5 minutes - if they're about 5kWh. The only significant advantage I can see is that they claim they don't catch fire. Whoopee. I bet they do though.