There are more electrical outlets than gas stations. I'm pretty sure I can find a few places where there are no gas stations for 300+ miles in any direction.
My point is any argument you make against EVs is an argument that can be, and has been, used against gasoline powered vehicles at some point. =Smidge=
I've done the math before, using my personal driving habits, and worked out going with electric would cost me about 10%-15% the cost of gasoline per mile, at $3/gallon and $0.22/kWh.
Which, for me, ends up about $100/year in electricity versus $700/year in gasoline. =Smidge=
Yes, there is. The last link in the summary even goes to a page with a diagram of the central planetary gear set. The engine can, and does, drive the wheels directly under certain conditions.
To quote said article:
"Once the Volt’s battery is depleted, the engine fires up and clutches to the generator to produce the power required to drive the car. Above 70 mph, when the generator couples to the ring gear, the engine gets a more efficient direct mechanical connection to the wheels."
There is nothing in my post that is incorrect, nor is there anything in my post that contradicts what you said.
You probably think I said something I didn't.
It is a parallel hybrid "with a twist." If you consider the Volt to be an EV simply because it can run in battery-only mode then the Prius is an EV because it, too, has a battery-only (aka Silent) mode. =Smidge=
Let's put it this way: if you remove the ICE in a Volt, will it still run? Of course, with about a 40 mile range.
And with a top speed of ~70MPH. The gearing means the electric motor hits top RPM right around there, and without another source of power you're not going any faster.
Can you do that in a Prius? Not without a conversion kit.
Ignoring the fact that you'll need a "kit" to convert the Volt as well, the Prius can (and does) run just fine in all-electric mode. Basically the procedure is the same for both vehicles: remove the ICE and lock the shaft it used to be connected to. Presto, both are now pure EVs.
The only difference is the Prius uses an electrically assisted ICE, and the Volt uses an ICE assisted electric motor. It is also not possible to use the Volt's engine as a generator without the vehicle moving, which I'm not sure counts as a good thing or not. =Smidge=
You're right. There is no infrastructure to support electric vehicles.
What we need is some kind of nation-wide distribution network for electrical power. That's probably decades away assuming you can find someone willing to spend the billions of dollars to install one.
Oh wait...
What you're missing: You charge your vehicle primarily at home - where your car spends the vast majority of its unused time anyway. Charging stations external to that are a bonus but not strictly required. For example you might have an exterior outlet on your office building you can use in lieu of a dedicated charging bollard.
If you're one of the people who think there must be an exact gas station analog in place for electric vehicles, you are wrong. The entire premise of EVs is that the "energy economy" they work in is completely different; distributed instead of centralized. Every outlet is a potential "gas station." =Smidge=
It's actually a parallel hybrid "with a twist." If the gasoline engine is running then it is (and must be) supplying mechanical energy directly to the wheels. However the gearing requires that the main electric motor must be driven at all times to provide vehicle motion - this is the hook GM uses to claim it's an EV+Extender and not a hybrid.
And thus qualify for all the tax credits. Barely. =Smidge=
Pretty much my reaction. DNA copying is a very high-fidelity but still imperfect process - why would RNA transcription and protein synthesis be any better?
More specifically, people want free health care but don't want "them" to have it, because "they" are moochers or lazy and are just taking advantage of the system. "If I get free handouts from the government, that's okay because I'm just getting my tax money back. God forbid someone else gets assistance, because that's my money, dammit!"
I know several people who have stated this point of view explicitly. The cognitive dissonance is tear-my-hair-out infuriating. =Smidge=
Supposedly they were unable to conclusively link the odor to the plant - people complained about the smell even when the plant wasn't operating. The state suspension was only temporary and the plant operated afterward in face of more complaints. But despite having proven that the odors were not coming from their plant and spending millions on upgrading tech to deal with the potential odors the whole thing kinda went belly-up when the parent company declared bankruptcy.
Basically the reported stench was pure NIMBY and nothing else. =Smidge=
You're the one that is advocating burning bridges but cutting back programs, not me. It's not that "my favorite pet subject" is more important, it's that "your least favorite subject" is not less important. Your hypocrisy is almost palpable.
We should not be cutting back programs like math just because you (or the article) feels it's a waste. We should not cut back on any subject, and we should work to make all subjects more appealing and encourage students to put their efforts into them.
Furthermore, being good at math and good at linguistics (to use your example) are not mutually exclusive. Shame on you for implying they are and shame on you for perpetuating the mythical idea that people are born/destined to be anything in particular. That very concept is self-defeating. =Smidge=
We should be pushing for everyone to learn Latin by the time they finish high school; how else would you become a doctor?
Actually not a bad idea; even if you have no interest in being a doctor, knowing something about Latin - which is a partial basis for the English language - will help improve your English skills.
In general, learning another language improves your skills in your native language. Assuming you're learning more than catchphrases, anyway.
Latin is also useful for those who deal with legal documents, BTW. Probably more so than medical professions. It's also useful in biology and related science fields. =Smidge=
Let the kids who have no talent for math and no inclination towards math based professions drop it once they have the basics.
I think it's a bad strategy to say things like "kids who have no talent for math." It's this rather antiquated view of education that's contributing to the problems.
I'm of the opinion that geniuses aren't born, they're made. Everyone - some specific, diagnosable medical problems notwithstanding - has the potential to excel at any discipline if they put the effort into it. The real difficulty, which was expressed by an earlier poster, is getting people to care enough to put in that effort.
Basically you're giving up on these kids rather than giving them the opportunity and motivation, which is a great disservice to their potential.
The world really doesn't need more ditch-diggers... we have machines for that. Machines that were designed by people who had the motivation to learn mathematics. =Smidge=
So you don't know how to do the math, but I must be wrong because you saw a graph that disagrees with me?
What were the charts of, exactly? What vehicles, if anything specific, were they for? What conditions were they assuming (CD, weight, speed etc)?
Your insults don't really stick unless you can back up your smack talk. The math is gradeschool algebra level. Try it yourself.
I chose the Insight because that's the kind of car an EV is, aerodynamically speaking. It's a good approximation for a generic electric vehicle. Even the weight is fairly close. Your personal preference for aesthetics is completely irrelevant. =Smidge=
The weight was included for calculation of rolling resistance on rubber tires.
"Other drags such as headlamps" and wheel wells are picked up as part of the vehicle's published drag coefficient.
Acceleration and deceleration are irrelevant because we're considering constant speed.
Total efficiency of the drivetrain, air conditioning etc. are similarly irrelevant since we're talking power required to maintain speed - not the total power the vehicle is capable of producing. (That makes your "10kW turdmobile" snipe pretty stupid...)
Additional passengers would make a slight difference, however that would be true for any kind of vehicle so that is also irrelevant for purposes of comparison. The effect of additional passengers is slight since that only increases the relatively minor rolling resistance: each additional 120lbs passenger adds a whopping 0.2HP to the requirement.
The point here is his fundamental assertion (30kW just to maintain 60MPH) was complete bullshit. I'm not sure what you do for a living, but if you think a 300% margin of error is acceptable you probably shouldn't be allowed to do it. =Smidge=
A lot of people have problems getting past the "gas station" analogy, and how EVs won't be viable until you can recharge them in a manner equivalent to refilling a gas tank.
But you, sir, are the first person to militantly defend that analogy. Kudos for completely missing the point, I guess.
What would be better: going a little out of your way and stopping for 6 minutes at a charging station maybe once a week, or never stopping at all because every time you get back into your car it's been recharged?
It's an important thing to understand: Electric vehicles are not just a technology, it's part of an entire energy ecosystem. You do not need - nor should you have - a system that mirrors petroleum distribution. =Smidge=
Having two battery's would help so you can keep charging while at work in the day unless of course you work nights.
Or you could use a charging station that's been installed outside your office, or at the train station if that's how you commute. A full charge for most EVs will be under $7 even in places with the highest electric rates in the country. If there aren't businesses and municipalities installing charging stations for free use just to attract people, then they could be set up like parking meters.
Unfortunately it's a chicken-egg problem. EVs won't become more popular until there are sufficient charging stations, and sufficient charging stations won't appear until EVs become more popular... but this is exactly the same problem people had when the gasoline powered car first came out; and fortunately there are people on both sides of the problem willing to take that early-adopter risk. =Smidge=
Lithium is the 18th most abundant element in the earth's crust. For example, there is more lithium laying around than:
Beryllium Nitrogen (excluding atmospheric nitrogen) Chromium Nickel Copper Zinc Gallium Germanium Tin Tungsten Lead
Now, I've read (PDF) there is ~30 million tons of lithium on reserve (meaning readily extractable with current infrastructure).
If you need 140 grams of lithium per kWh of battery then today's typical electric car will need 3.4 kg of the stuff, meaning you can make 588 million such cars per million tons. Right now there are about 800 million cars in the entire world. Advances in technology notwithstanding, roughly 4.5% of our currently available lithium supply will satisfy the entire global automotive market.
Peak lithium my ass. and does it need to be mentioned that, unlike petroleum, the lithium can be recycled? =Smidge=
Solution: Use fast charging only when necessary - which shouldn't be often since the battery should be topped-off every morning at the very least anyway.
The second generation Honda Insight has a drag coefficient of 0.25, a frontal area of approximately 26 square feet, a curb weight of up to 2,730 pounds.
From those specs: Power to maintain 60MPH is 13.9 HP - 10kW.
Your math is off by a factor of at least 3 right out of the gate. =Smidge=
That matters if and only if you expect to recharge your car at home in 6 minutes from nearly depleted to nearly full.
The main mode of operation for electric cars is destination charging: You plug it in when it's sitting unused for extended periods of time. The theoretical 6-minute recharge would require special facilities, but you probably would need to use that option infrequently since the car should be fully charged every time you leave home. =Smidge=
No, I'm assuming the more sensible people who complain about it anyway might gain some modicum of understanding.
And it's possible that some people might make hoax calls... but if you'll notice the tweets don't give any real detail so it's not clear how successful such a hoax would be, plus it's already illegal to knowingly make false reports so the joke will be on the caller when they end up being arrested. Good plan. =Smidge=
Slashdot Mirror
There are more electrical outlets than gas stations. I'm pretty sure I can find a few places where there are no gas stations for 300+ miles in any direction.
My point is any argument you make against EVs is an argument that can be, and has been, used against gasoline powered vehicles at some point.
=Smidge=
I've done the math before, using my personal driving habits, and worked out going with electric would cost me about 10%-15% the cost of gasoline per mile, at $3/gallon and $0.22/kWh.
Which, for me, ends up about $100/year in electricity versus $700/year in gasoline.
=Smidge=
Your average car gets (or SHOULD get) about 300 miles per tank of gas.
300 miles is just not that much. It's quite easy to exhaust this limit - just forget to stop at a gas station.
=Smidge=
Yes, there is. The last link in the summary even goes to a page with a diagram of the central planetary gear set. The engine can, and does, drive the wheels directly under certain conditions.
To quote said article:
"Once the Volt’s battery is depleted, the engine fires up and clutches to the generator to produce the power required to drive the car. Above 70 mph, when the generator couples to the ring gear, the engine gets a more efficient direct mechanical connection to the wheels."
=Smidge=
There is nothing in my post that is incorrect, nor is there anything in my post that contradicts what you said.
You probably think I said something I didn't.
It is a parallel hybrid "with a twist." If you consider the Volt to be an EV simply because it can run in battery-only mode then the Prius is an EV because it, too, has a battery-only (aka Silent) mode.
=Smidge=
And with a top speed of ~70MPH. The gearing means the electric motor hits top RPM right around there, and without another source of power you're not going any faster.
Ignoring the fact that you'll need a "kit" to convert the Volt as well, the Prius can (and does) run just fine in all-electric mode. Basically the procedure is the same for both vehicles: remove the ICE and lock the shaft it used to be connected to. Presto, both are now pure EVs.
The only difference is the Prius uses an electrically assisted ICE, and the Volt uses an ICE assisted electric motor. It is also not possible to use the Volt's engine as a generator without the vehicle moving, which I'm not sure counts as a good thing or not.
=Smidge=
You're right. There is no infrastructure to support electric vehicles.
What we need is some kind of nation-wide distribution network for electrical power. That's probably decades away assuming you can find someone willing to spend the billions of dollars to install one.
Oh wait...
What you're missing: You charge your vehicle primarily at home - where your car spends the vast majority of its unused time anyway. Charging stations external to that are a bonus but not strictly required. For example you might have an exterior outlet on your office building you can use in lieu of a dedicated charging bollard.
If you're one of the people who think there must be an exact gas station analog in place for electric vehicles, you are wrong. The entire premise of EVs is that the "energy economy" they work in is completely different; distributed instead of centralized. Every outlet is a potential "gas station."
=Smidge=
It's actually a parallel hybrid "with a twist." If the gasoline engine is running then it is (and must be) supplying mechanical energy directly to the wheels. However the gearing requires that the main electric motor must be driven at all times to provide vehicle motion - this is the hook GM uses to claim it's an EV+Extender and not a hybrid.
And thus qualify for all the tax credits. Barely.
=Smidge=
Pretty much my reaction. DNA copying is a very high-fidelity but still imperfect process - why would RNA transcription and protein synthesis be any better?
The overall concept is still true.
=Smidge=
More specifically, people want free health care but don't want "them" to have it, because "they" are moochers or lazy and are just taking advantage of the system. "If I get free handouts from the government, that's okay because I'm just getting my tax money back. God forbid someone else gets assistance, because that's my money, dammit!"
I know several people who have stated this point of view explicitly. The cognitive dissonance is tear-my-hair-out infuriating.
=Smidge=
Supposedly they were unable to conclusively link the odor to the plant - people complained about the smell even when the plant wasn't operating. The state suspension was only temporary and the plant operated afterward in face of more complaints. But despite having proven that the odors were not coming from their plant and spending millions on upgrading tech to deal with the potential odors the whole thing kinda went belly-up when the parent company declared bankruptcy.
Basically the reported stench was pure NIMBY and nothing else.
=Smidge=
Nice strawman there.
You're the one that is advocating burning bridges but cutting back programs, not me. It's not that "my favorite pet subject" is more important, it's that "your least favorite subject" is not less important. Your hypocrisy is almost palpable.
We should not be cutting back programs like math just because you (or the article) feels it's a waste. We should not cut back on any subject, and we should work to make all subjects more appealing and encourage students to put their efforts into them.
Furthermore, being good at math and good at linguistics (to use your example) are not mutually exclusive. Shame on you for implying they are and shame on you for perpetuating the mythical idea that people are born/destined to be anything in particular. That very concept is self-defeating.
=Smidge=
Actually not a bad idea; even if you have no interest in being a doctor, knowing something about Latin - which is a partial basis for the English language - will help improve your English skills.
In general, learning another language improves your skills in your native language. Assuming you're learning more than catchphrases, anyway.
Latin is also useful for those who deal with legal documents, BTW. Probably more so than medical professions. It's also useful in biology and related science fields.
=Smidge=
I think it's a bad strategy to say things like "kids who have no talent for math." It's this rather antiquated view of education that's contributing to the problems.
I'm of the opinion that geniuses aren't born, they're made. Everyone - some specific, diagnosable medical problems notwithstanding - has the potential to excel at any discipline if they put the effort into it. The real difficulty, which was expressed by an earlier poster, is getting people to care enough to put in that effort.
Basically you're giving up on these kids rather than giving them the opportunity and motivation, which is a great disservice to their potential.
The world really doesn't need more ditch-diggers... we have machines for that. Machines that were designed by people who had the motivation to learn mathematics.
=Smidge=
So you don't know how to do the math, but I must be wrong because you saw a graph that disagrees with me?
What were the charts of, exactly? What vehicles, if anything specific, were they for? What conditions were they assuming (CD, weight, speed etc)?
Your insults don't really stick unless you can back up your smack talk. The math is grade school algebra level. Try it yourself.
I chose the Insight because that's the kind of car an EV is, aerodynamically speaking. It's a good approximation for a generic electric vehicle. Even the weight is fairly close. Your personal preference for aesthetics is completely irrelevant.
=Smidge=
The weight was included for calculation of rolling resistance on rubber tires.
"Other drags such as headlamps" and wheel wells are picked up as part of the vehicle's published drag coefficient.
Acceleration and deceleration are irrelevant because we're considering constant speed.
Total efficiency of the drivetrain, air conditioning etc. are similarly irrelevant since we're talking power required to maintain speed - not the total power the vehicle is capable of producing. (That makes your "10kW turdmobile" snipe pretty stupid...)
Additional passengers would make a slight difference, however that would be true for any kind of vehicle so that is also irrelevant for purposes of comparison. The effect of additional passengers is slight since that only increases the relatively minor rolling resistance: each additional 120lbs passenger adds a whopping 0.2HP to the requirement.
The point here is his fundamental assertion (30kW just to maintain 60MPH) was complete bullshit. I'm not sure what you do for a living, but if you think a 300% margin of error is acceptable you probably shouldn't be allowed to do it.
=Smidge=
A lot of people have problems getting past the "gas station" analogy, and how EVs won't be viable until you can recharge them in a manner equivalent to refilling a gas tank.
But you, sir, are the first person to militantly defend that analogy. Kudos for completely missing the point, I guess.
What would be better: going a little out of your way and stopping for 6 minutes at a charging station maybe once a week, or never stopping at all because every time you get back into your car it's been recharged?
It's an important thing to understand: Electric vehicles are not just a technology, it's part of an entire energy ecosystem. You do not need - nor should you have - a system that mirrors petroleum distribution.
=Smidge=
Or you could use a charging station that's been installed outside your office, or at the train station if that's how you commute. A full charge for most EVs will be under $7 even in places with the highest electric rates in the country. If there aren't businesses and municipalities installing charging stations for free use just to attract people, then they could be set up like parking meters.
Unfortunately it's a chicken-egg problem. EVs won't become more popular until there are sufficient charging stations, and sufficient charging stations won't appear until EVs become more popular... but this is exactly the same problem people had when the gasoline powered car first came out; and fortunately there are people on both sides of the problem willing to take that early-adopter risk.
=Smidge=
Lithium is the 18th most abundant element in the earth's crust. For example, there is more lithium laying around than:
Beryllium
Nitrogen (excluding atmospheric nitrogen)
Chromium
Nickel
Copper
Zinc
Gallium
Germanium
Tin
Tungsten
Lead
Now, I've read (PDF) there is ~30 million tons of lithium on reserve (meaning readily extractable with current infrastructure).
If you need 140 grams of lithium per kWh of battery then today's typical electric car will need 3.4 kg of the stuff, meaning you can make 588 million such cars per million tons. Right now there are about 800 million cars in the entire world. Advances in technology notwithstanding, roughly 4.5% of our currently available lithium supply will satisfy the entire global automotive market.
Peak lithium my ass. and does it need to be mentioned that, unlike petroleum, the lithium can be recycled?
=Smidge=
Solution: Use fast charging only when necessary - which shouldn't be often since the battery should be topped-off every morning at the very least anyway.
=Smidge=
So... 30kW at 60MPH is the claim.
The second generation Honda Insight has a drag coefficient of 0.25, a frontal area of approximately 26 square feet, a curb weight of up to 2,730 pounds.
From those specs: Power to maintain 60MPH is 13.9 HP - 10kW.
Your math is off by a factor of at least 3 right out of the gate.
=Smidge=
900kW... at what voltage?
I can shove 900kW through a 4/0 cable real easy if I'm allowed to use a few thousand volts.
=Smidge=
That matters if and only if you expect to recharge your car at home in 6 minutes from nearly depleted to nearly full.
The main mode of operation for electric cars is destination charging: You plug it in when it's sitting unused for extended periods of time. The theoretical 6-minute recharge would require special facilities, but you probably would need to use that option infrequently since the car should be fully charged every time you leave home.
=Smidge=
To be fair, it IS the only way to be sure...
=Smidge=
No, I'm assuming the more sensible people who complain about it anyway might gain some modicum of understanding.
And it's possible that some people might make hoax calls... but if you'll notice the tweets don't give any real detail so it's not clear how successful such a hoax would be, plus it's already illegal to knowingly make false reports so the joke will be on the caller when they end up being arrested. Good plan.
=Smidge=