Electric Cars Not Yet Viable

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in news:WS%RE.1642$9F7.870@fx21.iad:

On 6/29/19 4:22 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 7:56:23 PM UTC+2, John Larkin
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 07:51:55 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com
wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Around ten years ago I thought, if this EV thing continues,
then we'll have to go that way. Like a car wash where your car
is pulled in and the battery pack swapped.

Since a lot of the enviro-left live in cities where they park
on the street you'd think they would have thought about the
impossibility of charging "at home." Imagine what would happen
if there were charging stations all along the sidewalk, aside
from being ugly. Pay with a credit card and plug in, then the
next guy parks in between stations that are in use, so he
unplugs you and connects himself. Extension cords would have
become available by then.



https://www.nhm.ac.uk/press-office/press-releases/leading-
scienti
sts-set-out-resource-challenge-of-meeting-net-zer.html

====

The metal resource needed to make all cars and vans electric by
2050 and all sales to be purely battery electric by 2035. To
replace all UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not
including the LGV and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most
resource-frugal next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take
207,900 tonnes cobalt, 264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate
(LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of neodymium and dysprosium, in
addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This represents, just under
two times the total annual world cobalt production, nearly the
entire world production of neodymium, three quarters the
world’s lithium production and at least half of the world’s
copper production during 2018. Even ensuring the annual supply
of electric vehicles only, from 2035 as pledged, will require
the UK to annually import the equivalent of the entire annual
cobalt needs of European industry.

=====

So what? Increase the demand, and the price goes up. Raise the
price and a whole lot of mines will open up again that got closed
down because their deposits weren't as easy to extract as those
at the happy few who were able to satisfy world demand when it
was lower.

When I was growing up in Tasmania, Tasmania's tin mines were
forever being opened up again when the tin price was high, and
closed down again as soon as there was enough supply to push the
tin price back down again.

Some people don't seem to understand how free markets work.


Each year, the world's gasoline-powered vehicles consume nearly
the entire world's annual production of gasoline

Lawn mowers, golf carts, agricultural machines... gasoline powered
aircraft...

Lots of other uses. Probably amounts to a percent or two.

 

[Rick C]

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 4:33:54 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:aaf5705b-5633-4857-aa8d-025c0e6c4afa@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 10:34:08 AM UTC-4, John Larkin
wrote:

Electric metering has some interesting math. It's actually hard
to make an electronic meter that's as good as the old rotating
disk things.

Quite doable, just a different but similar approach. The problem
is the range of power draw under which it must accurately gauge
usage.

It's easy to make one better. The rotating disk meter is easily
mucked by a simple magnet.


No, it is not (easily mucked up with a simple magnet)
.
You *might* be able to make a barely discernable difference in
reading the same loading IF you were spinning a magnet nearby.
Almost always will get zero net result, however.

Still not likely at all considering the construction.

The externally applied mag field will have virtually zero effect
on the disc while it is reading the same load. The two coils of AC
that actually "motor" the disc will not be influenced enough by your
static mag field to change their rotation pressure on the disc.
Any momentary perturbations will have a zero net result.

Placing a magnet close to the meter can saturate the disk and make it less responsive to the AC current. That's why utilities "outlaw" the practice. If you get caught, there is a fine of hundreds of dollars and they can try to estimate your usage and bill you for it.

Utilities aren't totally stupid when it comes to lost money.

--

Rick C.

+---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 5:30:48 AM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 21:08:07 -0700, Rick C wrote:

Cities like Washington, DC already have streets lined with parking
meters. They have more recently introduced kiosks where you pay for
anywhere on the block and put the receipt visible in the car, so a
single larger ugly thing rather than a number of smaller ugly things.

I'll bet few buyers have considered the implications if they live in a
conservation area where stuff like that would never get passed. Not sure
if you have those in America, but they're extremely common in the UK.

We have them, but people aren't anal about things like street lighting (is that allowed in the conservation districts?) and other improvements to the public areas. We tend to conserve the buildings, not the lifestyle.

--

Rick C.

+---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 30/06/19 13:30, Rick C wrote:

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 5:30:48 AM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 21:08:07 -0700, Rick C wrote:

Cities like Washington, DC already have streets lined with parking
meters. They have more recently introduced kiosks where you pay for
anywhere on the block and put the receipt visible in the car, so a single
larger ugly thing rather than a number of smaller ugly things.

I'll bet few buyers have considered the implications if they live in a
conservation area where stuff like that would never get passed. Not sure if
you have those in America, but they're extremely common in the UK.

We have them, but people aren't anal about things like street lighting (is
that allowed in the conservation districts?) and other improvements to the
public areas. We tend to conserve the buildings, not the lifestyle.

They may or may not be extremely anal about changes;
it depends on the area, the changes and the local
authorities.

For example, a city near me states:

There are 33 conservation areas in Bristol. Conservation
areas have a special character and appearance and we aim
to preserve or enhance them. A conservation area might
have:
historic road patterns, plots and boundaries
characteristic building materials and construction techniques
historic building uses
green spaces
*trees and street furniture*
distinctive views

https://www.bristol.gov.uk/planning-and-building-regulations/conservation-areas

Note particularly the "trees and street furniture".

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 11:38:03 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:

I understand that Teslas burn pretty well.

I've heard that many fire departments aren't equipped to handle those fires so they have to just let them burn, while hosing down what's around them to keep the fire from spreading.

I've seen one gasoline fueled car on fire, but it didn't emit the toxic chemicals that a burning EV does. What I've seen are request for foam equipment, like they use at airports but the cost is quite high, and would require separate trucks and crews so no one wants to pay for them on their taxes.

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 1:29:12 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:

In the old garden of Eden, there was no economy; all needs were
satisfied.

That was simple, since there were only two people to provide for.

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 8:11:56 AM UTC-4, downunder wrote:

Assume that we want to transfer a specific amount of power at the same
distance. To transfer the same power at 120 V (U120) requires twice
the current (I120) compared to the current (I240) at 240 V (U240).
I120 = 2 x I240.

1.) Assume the same conductor with resistance R is used in both cases.
The voltage drop will be
V120 = R x I120 = R x 2 x I240 and power loss
P120 = R x I120² = R x (2 x I240)².
Thus the voltage drop is twice that and power loss 4 times.

2.) Assume the wire cross section is doubled for the 120 V case, thus
resistance R2 = R/2. The voltage drop will be
V120 = R2 x I120 = R/2 x 2 x I240 and power loss
P120 = R2 x I120² = R/2 x (2 x I240)² = R x 2 x I240².
Thus the voltage drop is the same and power loss 2 times.

3.) Since the allowed voltage drop in distribution system is expressed
as a percentage of nominal voltage, e.g. 5 % of nominal voltage, the
cross section must be further doubled, i.e. the cross section must be
4 times, i.e. R3 = R/4. The voltage drop will be
V120 = R3 x I120 = R/4 x 2 x I240 = R/2 x I120 and power loss
P120 = R3 x I120² = R/4 x (2xI240)² = R x I240²..
Thus the voltage drop is halved and power loss is the same.

To conclude, in order to maintain the same voltage drop in percentage
voltage drop as well as also keep the total power losses the same, the
cross section needs to be quadrupled at 120 V compared to 240 V.

There are several situations that limits how much power can be
transferred in a wire, some technical, some economical.

1.) Maximum loss power allowed per meter. This depends of the heath
conductivity into the surrounding. A cable within some construction
material has the lowest allowed current density, an open wire in a
strong wind at sub-zero temperatures has the largest capacity.

2.) Maximum voltage allowed. This depends of the length of cable and
allowable voltage loss.

3.) Power lost in the cable is critical especially in high voltage
(high power) lines, i.e. how many power plants are needed for just
generate the power losses dissipated in a national grid. At some point
it becomes more economical to add thicker lines or complete new lines.

How far are you from the power company's transformer? I am less than 75 feet from mine, to my meter. Only a few circuits are long runs, and they are all 240 volt circuits, like for my submersible pump. It is ~80 feet below ground, and it the longest circuit on my property. It is still shorter than the three phase system used in many other countries. The pole pigs here are spaced between four our less homes, facing each other across a street. The local system is pretty much the standard 7200 volt to 240 split phase US system.

Some people keep screaming for everything to go underground, but that would require the removal of millions of trees along the roads. Areas with underground cal lose power during hurricanes, and flooded underground conduits are harder to repair than downed power lines. Some areas were flooded after Irma, and it took over a month to reopen some roads because they were under water.

When I lived in Ohio, a mall there lost power during the winters from snow getting into pad mounted transformers, and taking out dozens of stores, each time. It could take up to 24 hours to use heated forced air to dry out the underground lines. This mess was 'an improvement' to the original overhead power lines that had been trouble free for close to 70 years. Some 'genius' decided to convert four city blocks into an enclosed mall by building a canopy over the streets, which forced the overhead lines to be removed. This expensive farce forced many business to close because they lost their parking, and the closed roads diverted traffic away from these locations. The last I heard, they were tearing the canopies down, and restoring the original store fronts, or tearing down 10 to 15 story buildings that had sat empty for too many years.

 

[keith wright]

On Saturday, 29 June 2019 10:53:48 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
....

A fraction of the planet's current human population would survive
without the energy, materials, and fertilizers that we get from oil
and gas.
....

So wouldn't it be better to save the valuable oil for making materials and fertilizers rather than sending it up in smoke?

Oil is too valuable a chemical feedstock to waste where there are good alternatives.

Solar power has some advantages in places such as India where it can provide great benefits without high investments in infrastructure.

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 2:33:27 AM UTC-4, downunder wrote:

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 19:54:28 -0400, krw wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:39:13 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
wrote:

On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 11:13:57 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 07:51:03 -0700 (PDT), trader4 wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 10:50:32 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 10:47:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/24/19 3:52 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.


The flat packs weigh the better part of a 1000 lbs and fill most of the
negative space under the floor of the car how do you propose to swap
them out rapidly? they're part of the structure of the car

Tesla was working on this approach. I believe it was fairly recently (last four years maybe) they decided to drop the idea.

I would assume this was for something like taxis or other use where you need to keep the vehicle on the road most of the time. It's really not that big of a deal for a standard use vehicle even on trips.


See what you say when you have a family emergency and need to travel 400
miles and your car is near empty Even to go on a ski trip from NYC to VT
it's absurd. It's already a five or six hour trip and who wants to
make it even longer? I'm not going to plan my life around my car's
limitations.




Does it get cold in the winter in Vermont? E cars don't like cold.

Funny thing is gas and diesel cars don't like cold. They get hard to start, can't heat the passengers until they are warmed up and require being warmed up to prevent damage to the drive train before driving at highway speeds. Jeeze, these ICE things are complicated to use. Makes you wonder why anyone wants them...

Hogwash! A well maintained, modern, gas car is trivial to start down
to -40ish. They were an issue with carburetors and coils but with
fuel injection and electronic ignition, they start quite easily. Even
diesels are relatively easy to start as long as the fuel doesn't gel
(again, a maintenance thing). Once started, either works just as well
as it does in warm weather.

At those temperatures, diesels can be problematic. Diesels are hard to
crank and the battery capacity falls rapidly. If you forgot to connect
the block heater in the evening, the car might not start in the
morning.

During the day, you nay gave to cover the hood with an old rug to
maintain some of the morning commute heat in the motor compartment.
Still you may have to drive a short trip during the lunch break to
keep the temperatures reasonable for the evening commute.

At temperatures down to -20 C, diesels behave quite well, but when
going down to -40 C, things get complicated.

E cars don't. Period.

In addition to battery issues,does e.g. power steering work from the
start or is the driver kept warm driving around without power
steering.

I spent a year where the average temperature was -40 during the winter. Each parking place had a 20A outlet for heaters. Lower heater hose, battery blanket and dipstick heaters. 20A was barely enough to keep the vehicle usable, and the engines were cool to the touch in minutes. You had to use cardboard to block the radiators, or the cold air would frees the coolant.

Buses and construction equipment was store in heated garages at the Motor Pool. It wasn't uncommon to have to tow a diesel vehicle to those garages when they stopped running due to the cold. Let them sit overnight, and they would fire right up.

The standard 90W gear oil had to be changed to 10W during the winter for the rear end, and manual transmissions. This was pre steel belted tire days, so the nylon cords would freeze with a flat spot on the bottom of your tires. It was called 'The land of the square tires', and they issued you a certificate for surviving a year there.

The official record low was -69F at the NWS site, over a heated building, the unofficial low was -79F, at an unheated test site.

I doubt that an EV would be worth a damn under these conditions. Heat pumps are useless at those temperatures, and I have doubts that the lubricants in the electric motors would be any good.

How much power would you need to even bring the interior up to zero, let alone anything comfortable? How many miles would you get on a full charge?

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 09:49:42 -0700 (PDT), keith wright
<keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Saturday, 29 June 2019 10:56:23 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
..
====

The metal resource needed to make all cars and vans electric by 2050
and all sales to be purely battery electric by 2035. To replace all
UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not including the LGV
and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most resource-frugal
next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take 207,900 tonnes cobalt,
264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate (LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of
neodymium and dysprosium, in addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This
represents, just under two times the total annual world cobalt
production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three
quarters the world’s lithium production and at least half of the
world’s copper production during 2018. Even ensuring the annual supply
of electric vehicles only, from 2035 as pledged, will require the UK
to annually import the equivalent of the entire annual cobalt needs of
European industry.

=====

This seems to assume no further technical developments. What about phosphate cathodes, other metal based chemistries such as sodium or potassium. How about super capacitors? All those reduce or eliminate cobalt.

Capacitors store an absurdly small amount of energy compared to
batteries, which themselves store a lot less than hydrocarbon fuel.

Induction or reluctance switch motors don't use any rare-earth metals and the innovations such as the Halbach array that Tesla uses can reduce the amount used for the magnets with permanent magnet motors.

Yes, there are challenges but there is also room for innovation.

Sure. Let the market decide.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 09:35:46 -0700 (PDT), keith wright
<keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Saturday, 29 June 2019 10:53:48 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
...

A fraction of the planet's current human population would survive
without the energy, materials, and fertilizers that we get from oil
and gas.
...

So wouldn't it be better to save the valuable oil for making materials and fertilizers rather than sending it up in smoke?

Depends on how many people you are willing to kill.

When NG burns, there is no smoke.

Oil is too valuable a chemical feedstock to waste where there are good alternatives.

Hydro is great, but some people don't like dams.

Nukes, ditto.

Solar power has some advantages in places such as India where it can provide great benefits without high investments in infrastructure.

Solar and wind have the obvious intermittency and storage problems,
for anything past occasional loads (like water pumping) and light
loads (cell phones, LED lighting.)

India is increasingly using coal to generate electricity.

Australia is happy to sell it to them. Ditto China, Korea, and Japan.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:27:02 -0700, Michael Terrell wrote:

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 1:29:12 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:

In the old garden of Eden, there was no economy; all needs were
satisfied.

That was simple, since there were only two people to provide for.

And since they didn't actually exist, it was even simpler than that!



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[keith wright]

On Sunday, 30 June 2019 08:55:08 UTC-7, Michael Terrell wrote:
....

I doubt that an EV would be worth a damn under these conditions. Heat pumps are useless at those temperatures, and I have doubts that the lubricants in the electric motors would be any good.

Electric vehicles are designed for operation down to -40C.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:55:05 -0700, Michael Terrell wrote:

Buses and construction equipment was store in heated garages at the
Motor Pool. It wasn't uncommon to have to tow a diesel vehicle to those
garages when they stopped running due to the cold. Let them sit
overnight, and they would fire right up.

I saw this documentary about Russian truck drivers in Siberia. During the
winter months, they had to get up 90 minutes early to start a fire under
the engines of their trucks. Yes, a REAL actual FIRE! They'd let it burn
for over an hour to loosen everything up, then fire 'em up. This method
was primitive, but didn't require any electrical supply which might fail
or be unavailable wherever they'd parked up, and it worked 100% of the
time. Russians. Yeah, *they're* the boys.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[keith wright]

On Sunday, 30 June 2019 08:55:08 UTC-7, Michael Terrell wrote:
...

At temperatures down to -20 C, diesels behave quite well, but when
going down to -40 C, things get complicated.

E cars don't. Period.
....

Electric vehicles are designed for operation down to -40C.

The peak power and range available is lowered below freezing but they are still very viable, see their acceptance in Norway.

 

[keith wright]

On Saturday, 29 June 2019 10:56:23 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
...

===
The metal resource needed to make all cars and vans electric by 2050
and all sales to be purely battery electric by 2035. To replace all
UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not including the LGV
and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most resource-frugal
next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take 207,900 tonnes cobalt,
264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate (LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of
neodymium and dysprosium, in addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This
represents, just under two times the total annual world cobalt
production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three
quarters the world’s lithium production and at least half of the
world’s copper production during 2018. Even ensuring the annual supply
of electric vehicles only, from 2035 as pledged, will require the UK
to annually import the equivalent of the entire annual cobalt needs of
European industry.

====
This seems to assume no further technical developments. What about phosphate cathodes, other metal based chemistries such as sodium or potassium. How about super capacitors? All those reduce or eliminate cobalt.

Induction or reluctance switch motors don't use any rare-earth metals and the innovations such as the Halbach array that Tesla uses can reduce the amount used for the magnets with permanent magnet motors.

Yes, there are challenges but there is also room for innovation.

 

[keith wright]

On Sunday, 30 June 2019 10:18:41 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
...

...

So wouldn't it be better to save the valuable oil for making materials and fertilizers rather than sending it up in smoke?

Depends on how many people you are willing to kill.

Huh? Where did that come from?

> When NG burns, there is no smoke.

I was being metaphorical.

....

 

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 16:52:44 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<curd@notformail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:55:05 -0700, Michael Terrell wrote:

Buses and construction equipment was store in heated garages at the
Motor Pool. It wasn't uncommon to have to tow a diesel vehicle to those
garages when they stopped running due to the cold. Let them sit
overnight, and they would fire right up.

I saw this documentary about Russian truck drivers in Siberia. During the
winter months, they had to get up 90 minutes early to start a fire under
the engines of their trucks. Yes, a REAL actual FIRE! They'd let it burn
for over an hour to loosen everything up, then fire 'em up. This method
was primitive, but didn't require any electrical supply which might fail
or be unavailable wherever they'd parked up, and it worked 100% of the
time. Russians. Yeah, *they're* the boys.

An even better tactic is letting the engine run through the night, so
the engine might run continuously through the whole winter.

I do not know how effective this is, but if the engine was shut down
for the night, the lorry driver sometimes left the cabin light on
through the night. This was supposed to keep the battery warmer, thus
the capacity loss was not so bad and the engine might start easier.

During the Winter War 1939/40 the temperature was often -40 C. Finnish
Air Force mechanics sometimes emptied the engine oil into kettles
after the last sortie for the evening. The kettles were kept on open
fire through the night and the warm oil was poured back into the
engines just before the first sortie the next morning.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1915008c-44c6-43dc-949c-3765c77779d0@googlegroups.com:

Placing a magnet close to the meter can saturate the disk and make
it less responsive to the AC current.

'the disc' is Aluminum.

By 'saturate' I guess you mean that the molecular alignment gets
locked and no longer follows the sine wave of the power signature.

I am still skeptical that there is any influence. Must take a pretty
big magnet too.

 

[keith wright]

On Sunday, 30 June 2019 10:22:18 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
....

This seems to assume no further technical developments. What about phosphate cathodes, other metal based chemistries such as sodium or potassium. How about super capacitors? All those reduce or eliminate cobalt.

Capacitors store an absurdly small amount of energy

Currently yes - but do you know any theoretical limits?

> batteries, which themselves store a lot less than hydrocarbon fuel.

With current vehicles the ratio is only about 4:1 in favour of hydrocarbons when the conversion efficiency is taken into account.

Induction or reluctance switch motors don't use any rare-earth metals and the innovations such as the Halbach array that Tesla uses can reduce the amount used for the magnets with permanent magnet motors.

Yes, there are challenges but there is also room for innovation.

Sure. Let the market decide.

If we want to level the playing field we will need to increase subsidies to EVs and renewable energy in general!

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/danielle-droitsch/time-us-end-fossil-fuel-subsidies

If the US keeps burying its head in the sand and living in the past it will be left behind in future markets as it is out-developed by China and Europe.