I wouldn't even call MSNBC "equally" bias. They are bias, and they don't do much to hide that fact (like adopting a slogan like "fair and balanced")... but "equally" bias?
I can't think of any examples where MSNBC hosts openly shilled, on the air, for political candidates. I can't think of any national events MSNBC has helped engineer. I can't think of any politicians that MSNBC supported and ultimately hired as on-air personalities when their campaigns failed. There have not been any leaked e-mails from top MSNBC employees to their on-air personalities, grooming them in what language to use when presenting certain issues.
No fucking way is MSNBC equally bias to Fox. =Smidge=
What type of electric car battery needs to be replaced every 2 years? That's virtually unheard of. Even lead-acid batteries last longer than that. First generation NiMH EV packs have been on the road for 14 years and counting. The latest round of EVs coming to market in 2011 typically warranty the battery for 8 years.
10 year battery life with 30% capacity loss or less after that time is easily achievable. Maybe you're abusing those laptop batteries more than you think. =Smidge=
AC is actually NOT better for long (and I mean LONG) distances. Short to medium runs (dozens of miles) it's not too bad and the ability to efficiently change voltages with AC using transformers means you can keep current down and wire sizes small.
AC won out in the beginning because there was no cost effective means to alter DC voltage between efficient transmission voltage and safe/practical usage voltage.
However, wires have capacitance. Overcoming that capacitance requires energy, which is an inefficiency. When your cable goes from dozens of miles to hundreds of miles these losses become significant. DC doesn't have to deal with the capacitance issue, so it is actually more efficient here. Modern solid state power electronics also make changing DC voltages efficient and practical enough to use HVDC across long distances and Medium-Low Voltage AC for local distribution.
Add superconductors to the mix and the advantage of DC increases substantially.
Lastly, transmitting in DC solves problems with synchronizing and matching AC frequencies where otherwise independent grids interconnect. Each end of the DC link doesn't "see" or care about the frequency/timing of the other end. =Smidge=
Kramnik decided to try and confuse the robot by putting a pawn between two squares, which seemed to work (the robot did nothing). He then fixed the location of the pawn and reset the timer. When the robot still didn't respond after a few seconds, he reached out to touch it and it started playing again.
Serious question: What federal restrictions are preventing battery swap technology?
I can only think of one actual law that is sorta in the way, but in theory that is easily fixed by updating the law.
I think Chile is in a bigger position to leverage lithium, given that their estimated reserve is nearly 15 times that of China's.
Fuel cells have their own problems that people cite battery tech for: poisonous/rare metals, short lifespan, high cost. There are also more technical challenges to be solved if you want to use hydrogen. Then there's the uncomfortable fact that the bulk of our hydrogen production capacity is done through methane reformation - which produces CO2, something a lot of H2 proponents say isn't a factor in the hydrogen economy. Oops.
But I agree that biofuels are an essential part of the puzzle - and so are EVs. Bioethanol is more palpable with the 2nd generation tech which can process cellulose... the problem is not bioethanol so much as bioethanol from food crops. =Smidge=
Yes it does. Swap stations are being built right now.
2. It goes totaly counter your "don't think of it as replacing gas stations" statment.
No it doesn't, since it is a range-extension service and not a primary recharge method, you would ideally need only a fraction of the swap stations as you would gas stations. They are not a gas station analog.
I'm sorry if your habits might have to change along with the technology. Feel free to keep buying gasoline if you're so dead set in your ways.
3. what cost?
The company that is rolling out these stations legally owns the battery packs for liability reasons. They also lease you the car for legal reasons (since you can't legally sell a car that isn't usable, you can't sell an EV without a battery)
The cost of the battery is taken care of as part of the lease, which is claimed to cost not much more than your typical car lease. They make a small profit on the recharging, so if a battery recharge costs $3 in electricity and say $5 in handling/testing/repairs, the swap costs $20 to you. That's comparable to a tank of gas for similar range.
And you wouldn't need it, or use it, all the time.
Your arguments about evacuations and such are pretty far out there: what about people that have no cars at all, etc? Really seem to be grasping at straws on that one...
Regarding maintenance, Nissan is offering an 8 year, 100,000 mile warranty on their battery pack. It is expected to retain 70% of its max capacity over that time.
As far as maintenance on the vehicle itself goes, there is considerably less to worry about: LED lights all around last for hundreds of thousands of hours. Synchronous AC motor also good for hundreds of thousands of hours. Minimal gearing is permanently lubricated. Brake wear is less than typical car due to regenerative braking absorbing some of the load. Tire wear is comparable. Everything else is solid-state electronics. No filters. No oil or coolant to change. The only fluid is windshield washer fluid. The battery is by far the most limiting factor, but it's still expected to be good for a full decade and the technology stands to keep improving with time.
Lastly, I also support alternatives like CNG and biofuels, however they are better suited for trucking than for passenger cars. CNG in particular has the same storage-limited range problem that EVs do, only worse because it requires special fueling equipment. =Smidge=
It's not clear that peak electricity demand will increase significantly, since most EVs are intended to be charged overnight, when relatively little electricity is being used.
Peak usage is what causes brownouts and other problems. You need to design the grid and generating capacity for peak loads, which can be up to 5 times higher than during off-peak time. During those times the electric infrastructure is critically underutilized and it actually hurts overall efficiency to have power plants running their turbines but not generating any power.
So done right, adding EV charging loads to the grid at the right times will actually increase efficiency of the whole system. =Smidge=
tl;dr: It'll take ~16 hours to recharge the energy equivalent of 20 gallons of gasoline from a 220V outlet.
Which is fair. EVs are optimally kept topped-off rather than running it down completely and recharging.
A few posts down I posted a link to this video demonstration of a battery swapping station. The company that is behind it has been developing vehicle and swap station infrastructure in select areas around the world. Such stations - at least in concept - would mitigate a lot of the range problems people associate with EVs.
Though I'm only cautiously optimistic about it since there are standardization issues that need to be worked out for broad application. =Smidge=
It strikes me as an awfully dicey publicity stunt to invest three quarters of a billion dollars in a technology (25,000 vehicles at $25K-$30K a pop) to kick up sales for a product they don't even have a market lock on. Even if they get a deep discount on the vehicles, they are worthless if the tech doesn't live up to the hype and have to be replaced again in a few years.
Even if there is value to be gained from this, it's not the kind of thing you do unless you are really confident in the technology. This goes way beyond mere publicity stunt - they really have to believe it's a good move all around. =Smidge=
The technology is only just starting to get implemented, and there are a lot of challenges viz-a-viz standardization and ownership before it's a widely available method, but...
Would a 2-minute battery swap operation suit your particular needs, if such an option was available? =Smidge=
Well, at the very least odometer readings when registering a vehicle (though maybe not when RE-registering) are required by federal law, since tampering with odometers is a federal crime.
So at the very least every state has SOME mechanism in place to track that info. Taxing miles driven in lieu of fuel tax is just a hypothesis on my part anyway. =Smidge=
Apparently what the engine will not do is charge the batteries. At speeds of less than 70MPH but with a depleted battery pack, the engine provides motive power only indirectly through the electrical generator.
The assertion posted elsewhere that there is no mechanical link between engine and wheels is still wrong, however that is only under certain circumstances.
Really? Last time I rented a car it took like 20 minutes (walked in the door with no reservations), they put a $100 hold on my credit card and I got a 4-door compact thing for the weekend - cost me like $60 including gas plus I opted for $20 in additional "not my problem" insurance. For no extra charge they offered to pick up the car from my house. I dunno, I guess some rental places are better than others!
I can't argue that plug-in hybrids have a better "comfort zone" and familiarity. I also recognize they have an important transitional role, both because EVs require changes in both perception AND habit. I consider hybrids to be a form of training wheels.
But I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on potential market for EVs. =Smidge=
My primary point, above, is that most people have just one vehicle, so even a 95% suitable vehicle won't work for most people. In short, give me the figures for those people who NEVER drive more than 80 miles per day, and I'll use those numbers. 10% sounds about right to me.
Well, I do acknowledge and accept that some people are in that situation. In your case you seem to make two long trips per month, so as things stand now it probably isn't an option for you. If it was like once every other month, though, renting a car for that occasion might be a viable option. I sometimes rent even though I own a perfectly good car because I don't want to leave my car parked in the city:)
Surely you don't think that EVERYONE who can possibly get by with an electric car will run right out and buy one???
Of course not! There are lots of people who COULD get by perfectly well with a compact or sedan that buy and use SUVs exclusively, so it would be completely delusional to think people would only ever buy a car that suits their practical needs and nothing more.
But 10% market penetration is still tens of millions of cars in the US alone, and the situation only seems to get better with time. =Smidge=
As someone else eloquently put it: "Smart cars don't fix retarded drivers..."
OTOH I know the Leaf in particular includes all kinds of range indicators, warnings (visual, audible and voice) when you're getting low, in-dash GPS with locations of nearby known charging points and a range circle, and an additional mode to conserve power in case you're really screwing up. You really have fewer excuses for running out of battery than running out of gas. =Smidge=
The tax thing is interesting and I you're the first person I've encountered that brought that up... I honestly don't know how they'll handle it, but they certainly will have to do something. Best guess - and the fairest IMHO - is to replace fuel tax with a surcharge on actual miles driven. You're already required to report odometer readings with inspections/registrations so that seems like a logical place to levy a fee when you renew your registration or whatever.
As for electrical power: half-assed research on my part shows fossil fuel usage (as a percent of total power generation) has been declining for almost a decade with the balance being filled with renewables. So hurray for that! =Smidge=
Well I was really just being snarky with that and turning the whole argument around to point out that these objections existed for gasoline powered cars too - after all, a horse only needs grass and water and you can find those anywhere!
But since it was never specified where I was allowed to select a location that is 300+ miles from the nearest gas station - and with the only implied restriction being that it be somewhere on this planet - I'll start with the entire continent of Antarctica and we can work north from there.:) =Smidge=
Agreed that apartment living makes things a lit more difficult. This is a recognized problem from manufacturers like Nissan as well.
However, I disagree that public charging stations are restricting potential market to "1%." Statistics released by the federal transportation department show that 80% of people rarely drive more than 40 miles per day. Even allowing for the occasional trip to a relative's house (which is certainly a valid argument) there is surely a number of people for whom a 100 mile range is perfectly adequate - somewhere between 1% and 80%.
For the record, I'd be one of them if I didn't already own a car that was in good repair and gets decent economy (7 years old, ~28 on average.) This car isn't going to last forever and an EV is absolutely an option I'll be considering when that time comes, probably in another 3-4 years.
Anyway. I'm aware a lot of people have reservations about new technologies, especially if there will be a lot of inconvenience if the tech fails... a dead battery in your iPod is not going to get you stranded on the side of the road. So I would expect market penetration to be quite slow at first, until people get more accustomed to what they can do and how they perform. Something like the Volt is a good stopgap here and I recognize that as well, however flawed I think GM's handling of the vehicle design and marketing has been. (I just can't shake the feeling that the Volt will be the FV1 of the 21st century...)
But my point is, from earlier, that rapid-charge (aka "level 3") stations are absolutely not a showstopper for introducing electric vehicles to market. There is still enough people who can get by without them that public awareness will increase. It is not the chicken-and-egg problem some people make it out to be.
And obviously there are some people for whom an electric vehicle will legitimately not be a viable option. But the flip side to that objection is that we all shouldn't be driving semi trucks all the time because we might need it someday. The right vehicle for the right application, and I think a lot of people will be surprised how a current-generation EV will actually suit there needs when they really sit down and work it all out.
How much power do you think these things actually draw? If you can run a vacuum cleaner for 10 min without burning the house down, then you can charge an EV overnight.
Realistically, you should very rarely need the high-voltage "level 3" charge. Again, to equate EV charging stations with gas stations is a very big mistake as the two operate in very different ways.
Though I agree that range extension vehicles like the Volt are a good concept, but pretty meh in practice.
The guys at MSNBC decided to drive one from Seattle to San Francisco and got only mid-40s for fuel economy. That's pretty underwhelming considering the hype and cost. =Smidge=
Slashdot Mirror
So did either Olbermann or Maddow openly and directly solicit the viewing audience for donations to a particular politician's campaign?
=Smidge=
I wouldn't even call MSNBC "equally" bias. They are bias, and they don't do much to hide that fact (like adopting a slogan like "fair and balanced")... but "equally" bias?
I can't think of any examples where MSNBC hosts openly shilled, on the air, for political candidates. I can't think of any national events MSNBC has helped engineer. I can't think of any politicians that MSNBC supported and ultimately hired as on-air personalities when their campaigns failed. There have not been any leaked e-mails from top MSNBC employees to their on-air personalities, grooming them in what language to use when presenting certain issues.
No fucking way is MSNBC equally bias to Fox.
=Smidge=
What type of electric car battery needs to be replaced every 2 years? That's virtually unheard of. Even lead-acid batteries last longer than that. First generation NiMH EV packs have been on the road for 14 years and counting. The latest round of EVs coming to market in 2011 typically warranty the battery for 8 years.
10 year battery life with 30% capacity loss or less after that time is easily achievable. Maybe you're abusing those laptop batteries more than you think.
=Smidge=
They should put a camera inside the vehicle instead so investigators can see what the driver was distracted by when they ran Grandma over.
Or maybe they should be more stringent in the requirements for getting a license in the first place.
=Smidge=
Damn! The fatal flaw! Our plans are ruined - RUINED!
If only there was some way to store energy!
=Smidge=
AC is actually NOT better for long (and I mean LONG) distances. Short to medium runs (dozens of miles) it's not too bad and the ability to efficiently change voltages with AC using transformers means you can keep current down and wire sizes small.
AC won out in the beginning because there was no cost effective means to alter DC voltage between efficient transmission voltage and safe/practical usage voltage.
However, wires have capacitance. Overcoming that capacitance requires energy, which is an inefficiency. When your cable goes from dozens of miles to hundreds of miles these losses become significant. DC doesn't have to deal with the capacitance issue, so it is actually more efficient here. Modern solid state power electronics also make changing DC voltages efficient and practical enough to use HVDC across long distances and Medium-Low Voltage AC for local distribution.
Add superconductors to the mix and the advantage of DC increases substantially.
Lastly, transmitting in DC solves problems with synchronizing and matching AC frequencies where otherwise independent grids interconnect. Each end of the DC link doesn't "see" or care about the frequency/timing of the other end.
=Smidge=
If you think spending all day on Facebook makes you LESS solitary then you might have just supported the theory posed in the summary.
=Smidge=
I don't know who you were quoting but I never said that.
It's obvious that he's reaching out to grab or push the robot, since it had not moved for some time. He was not trying to shake hands with it.
=Smidge=
Kramnik decided to try and confuse the robot by putting a pawn between two squares, which seemed to work (the robot did nothing). He then fixed the location of the pawn and reset the timer. When the robot still didn't respond after a few seconds, he reached out to touch it and it started playing again.
=Smidge=
Serious question: What federal restrictions are preventing battery swap technology?
I can only think of one actual law that is sorta in the way, but in theory that is easily fixed by updating the law.
I think Chile is in a bigger position to leverage lithium, given that their estimated reserve is nearly 15 times that of China's.
Fuel cells have their own problems that people cite battery tech for: poisonous/rare metals, short lifespan, high cost. There are also more technical challenges to be solved if you want to use hydrogen. Then there's the uncomfortable fact that the bulk of our hydrogen production capacity is done through methane reformation - which produces CO2, something a lot of H2 proponents say isn't a factor in the hydrogen economy. Oops.
But I agree that biofuels are an essential part of the puzzle - and so are EVs. Bioethanol is more palpable with the 2nd generation tech which can process cellulose... the problem is not bioethanol so much as bioethanol from food crops.
=Smidge=
Yes it does. Swap stations are being built right now.
No it doesn't, since it is a range-extension service and not a primary recharge method, you would ideally need only a fraction of the swap stations as you would gas stations. They are not a gas station analog.
I'm sorry if your habits might have to change along with the technology. Feel free to keep buying gasoline if you're so dead set in your ways.
The company that is rolling out these stations legally owns the battery packs for liability reasons. They also lease you the car for legal reasons (since you can't legally sell a car that isn't usable, you can't sell an EV without a battery)
The cost of the battery is taken care of as part of the lease, which is claimed to cost not much more than your typical car lease. They make a small profit on the recharging, so if a battery recharge costs $3 in electricity and say $5 in handling/testing/repairs, the swap costs $20 to you. That's comparable to a tank of gas for similar range.
And you wouldn't need it, or use it, all the time.
Your arguments about evacuations and such are pretty far out there: what about people that have no cars at all, etc? Really seem to be grasping at straws on that one...
Regarding maintenance, Nissan is offering an 8 year, 100,000 mile warranty on their battery pack. It is expected to retain 70% of its max capacity over that time.
As far as maintenance on the vehicle itself goes, there is considerably less to worry about: LED lights all around last for hundreds of thousands of hours. Synchronous AC motor also good for hundreds of thousands of hours. Minimal gearing is permanently lubricated. Brake wear is less than typical car due to regenerative braking absorbing some of the load. Tire wear is comparable. Everything else is solid-state electronics. No filters. No oil or coolant to change. The only fluid is windshield washer fluid. The battery is by far the most limiting factor, but it's still expected to be good for a full decade and the technology stands to keep improving with time.
Lastly, I also support alternatives like CNG and biofuels, however they are better suited for trucking than for passenger cars. CNG in particular has the same storage-limited range problem that EVs do, only worse because it requires special fueling equipment.
=Smidge=
It's not clear that peak electricity demand will increase significantly, since most EVs are intended to be charged overnight, when relatively little electricity is being used.
Peak usage is what causes brownouts and other problems. You need to design the grid and generating capacity for peak loads, which can be up to 5 times higher than during off-peak time. During those times the electric infrastructure is critically underutilized and it actually hurts overall efficiency to have power plants running their turbines but not generating any power.
So done right, adding EV charging loads to the grid at the right times will actually increase efficiency of the whole system.
=Smidge=
tl;dr: It'll take ~16 hours to recharge the energy equivalent of 20 gallons of gasoline from a 220V outlet.
Which is fair. EVs are optimally kept topped-off rather than running it down completely and recharging.
A few posts down I posted a link to this video demonstration of a battery swapping station. The company that is behind it has been developing vehicle and swap station infrastructure in select areas around the world. Such stations - at least in concept - would mitigate a lot of the range problems people associate with EVs.
Though I'm only cautiously optimistic about it since there are standardization issues that need to be worked out for broad application.
=Smidge=
It strikes me as an awfully dicey publicity stunt to invest three quarters of a billion dollars in a technology (25,000 vehicles at $25K-$30K a pop) to kick up sales for a product they don't even have a market lock on. Even if they get a deep discount on the vehicles, they are worthless if the tech doesn't live up to the hype and have to be replaced again in a few years.
Even if there is value to be gained from this, it's not the kind of thing you do unless you are really confident in the technology. This goes way beyond mere publicity stunt - they really have to believe it's a good move all around.
=Smidge=
The technology is only just starting to get implemented, and there are a lot of challenges viz-a-viz standardization and ownership before it's a widely available method, but...
Would a 2-minute battery swap operation suit your particular needs, if such an option was available?
=Smidge=
Well, at the very least odometer readings when registering a vehicle (though maybe not when RE-registering) are required by federal law, since tampering with odometers is a federal crime.
So at the very least every state has SOME mechanism in place to track that info. Taxing miles driven in lieu of fuel tax is just a hypothesis on my part anyway.
=Smidge=
I looked into it again and I do stand corrected.
Apparently what the engine will not do is charge the batteries. At speeds of less than 70MPH but with a depleted battery pack, the engine provides motive power only indirectly through the electrical generator.
The assertion posted elsewhere that there is no mechanical link between engine and wheels is still wrong, however that is only under certain circumstances.
So my apologies for that.
=Smidge=
Really? Last time I rented a car it took like 20 minutes (walked in the door with no reservations), they put a $100 hold on my credit card and I got a 4-door compact thing for the weekend - cost me like $60 including gas plus I opted for $20 in additional "not my problem" insurance. For no extra charge they offered to pick up the car from my house. I dunno, I guess some rental places are better than others!
I can't argue that plug-in hybrids have a better "comfort zone" and familiarity. I also recognize they have an important transitional role, both because EVs require changes in both perception AND habit. I consider hybrids to be a form of training wheels.
But I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on potential market for EVs.
=Smidge=
Well, I do acknowledge and accept that some people are in that situation. In your case you seem to make two long trips per month, so as things stand now it probably isn't an option for you. If it was like once every other month, though, renting a car for that occasion might be a viable option. I sometimes rent even though I own a perfectly good car because I don't want to leave my car parked in the city :)
Of course not! There are lots of people who COULD get by perfectly well with a compact or sedan that buy and use SUVs exclusively, so it would be completely delusional to think people would only ever buy a car that suits their practical needs and nothing more.
But 10% market penetration is still tens of millions of cars in the US alone, and the situation only seems to get better with time.
=Smidge=
As someone else eloquently put it: "Smart cars don't fix retarded drivers..."
OTOH I know the Leaf in particular includes all kinds of range indicators, warnings (visual, audible and voice) when you're getting low, in-dash GPS with locations of nearby known charging points and a range circle, and an additional mode to conserve power in case you're really screwing up. You really have fewer excuses for running out of battery than running out of gas.
=Smidge=
The tax thing is interesting and I you're the first person I've encountered that brought that up... I honestly don't know how they'll handle it, but they certainly will have to do something. Best guess - and the fairest IMHO - is to replace fuel tax with a surcharge on actual miles driven. You're already required to report odometer readings with inspections/registrations so that seems like a logical place to levy a fee when you renew your registration or whatever.
As for electrical power: half-assed research on my part shows fossil fuel usage (as a percent of total power generation) has been declining for almost a decade with the balance being filled with renewables. So hurray for that!
=Smidge=
Well I was really just being snarky with that and turning the whole argument around to point out that these objections existed for gasoline powered cars too - after all, a horse only needs grass and water and you can find those anywhere!
But since it was never specified where I was allowed to select a location that is 300+ miles from the nearest gas station - and with the only implied restriction being that it be somewhere on this planet - I'll start with the entire continent of Antarctica and we can work north from there. :)
=Smidge=
Agreed that apartment living makes things a lit more difficult. This is a recognized problem from manufacturers like Nissan as well.
However, I disagree that public charging stations are restricting potential market to "1%." Statistics released by the federal transportation department show that 80% of people rarely drive more than 40 miles per day. Even allowing for the occasional trip to a relative's house (which is certainly a valid argument) there is surely a number of people for whom a 100 mile range is perfectly adequate - somewhere between 1% and 80%.
For the record, I'd be one of them if I didn't already own a car that was in good repair and gets decent economy (7 years old, ~28 on average.) This car isn't going to last forever and an EV is absolutely an option I'll be considering when that time comes, probably in another 3-4 years.
Anyway. I'm aware a lot of people have reservations about new technologies, especially if there will be a lot of inconvenience if the tech fails... a dead battery in your iPod is not going to get you stranded on the side of the road. So I would expect market penetration to be quite slow at first, until people get more accustomed to what they can do and how they perform. Something like the Volt is a good stopgap here and I recognize that as well, however flawed I think GM's handling of the vehicle design and marketing has been. (I just can't shake the feeling that the Volt will be the FV1 of the 21st century...)
But my point is, from earlier, that rapid-charge (aka "level 3") stations are absolutely not a showstopper for introducing electric vehicles to market. There is still enough people who can get by without them that public awareness will increase. It is not the chicken-and-egg problem some people make it out to be.
And obviously there are some people for whom an electric vehicle will legitimately not be a viable option. But the flip side to that objection is that we all shouldn't be driving semi trucks all the time because we might need it someday. The right vehicle for the right application, and I think a lot of people will be surprised how a current-generation EV will actually suit there needs when they really sit down and work it all out.
FWIW one last thing worth mentioning is that the first real-world test of the Leaf saw 116 miles at 94.9% battery utilization.
=Smidge=
How much power do you think these things actually draw? If you can run a vacuum cleaner for 10 min without burning the house down, then you can charge an EV overnight.
15A at 115V in ~8 hours.
=Smidge=
Realistically, you should very rarely need the high-voltage "level 3" charge. Again, to equate EV charging stations with gas stations is a very big mistake as the two operate in very different ways.
Though I agree that range extension vehicles like the Volt are a good concept, but pretty meh in practice.
The guys at MSNBC decided to drive one from Seattle to San Francisco and got only mid-40s for fuel economy. That's pretty underwhelming considering the hype and cost.
=Smidge=