The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Topic started by: rangerrebew on May 10, 2021, 06:03:01 pm
-
Electric vehicles cheaper than combustion by 2027, study predicts
Datum: 10. Mai 2021Autor: uwe.roland.gross 0 Kommentare
A prediction from Bloomberg. Only 5-6 years to wait to see if it comes true. If EVs and plug-in hybrids are going to be much cheaper by then, there’s even less incentive to buy one now. A looming shortage of battery materials could put a spanner in the works.
– – –
Electric cars will be cheaper to build than fossil fuel vehicles across Europe within six years and could represent 100 percent of new sales by 2035, according to a study published Monday, says TechXplore.
Carmakers are shifting en masse to electric and hybrid models in order to bring average fleet emissions under a European Union limit of 95 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre, or face heavy penalties.
The study by Bloomberg New Energy Finance found that electric sedans and sport-utility vehicles will be as cheap to make as combustion vehicles from 2026.
https://climate-science.press/2021/05/10/electric-vehicles-cheaper-than-combustion-by-2027-study-predicts/
-
Where will all the additional electric power come from to power these cars?
-
Where will all the additional electric power come from to power these cars?
They'll burn natural gas and oil at power plants outside of view of course...
-
They'll burn natural gas and oil at power plants outside of view of course...
Ok, but where will all the additional necessary power plants come from? AFAIK, they haven't even started designing, let alone permitting, let alone constructing, the number of new power plants that will be needed.
-
Ok, but where will all the additional necessary power plants come from? AFAIK, they haven't even started designing, let alone permitting, let alone constructing, the number of new power plants that will be needed.
Fairy dust and unicorn farts will make all the electricity necessary to power the new electric cars........
-
Fairy dust and unicorn farts will make all the electricity necessary to power the new electric cars........
That's probably more realistic than so-called renewables.
-
They'll burn natural gas and oil at power plants outside of view of course...
Exactly. Or pipe in oil from overseas to run those plants (since Biden killed our energy independence).
But I do think the extra electricity needed is a bit overstated - typically people charge cars in the evening, when the demand for electricity is lower. This actually lowers the ratio of peak to average power, which is a good thing for the power companies.
-
Where will all the additional electric power come from to power these cars?
From right here, silly.
(https://www.bonney.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/power-outlet.jpg)
-
From right here, silly.
(https://www.bonney.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/power-outlet.jpg)
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:
-
...But I do think the extra electricity needed is a bit overstated - typically people charge cars in the evening, when the demand for electricity is lower. This actually lowers the ratio of peak to average power, which is a good thing for the power companies.
The energy used in the transportation sector is double the entire delivered electric power system. They won't replace it just by charging from the off peak times.
(https://i.postimg.cc/QC5vYhvt/Capture.jpg)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/flow/total_energy_2020.pdf
-
From right here, silly.
(https://www.bonney.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/power-outlet.jpg)
:silly:
-
The energy used in the transportation sector is double the entire delivered electric power system. They won't replace it just by charging from the off peak times.
(https://i.postimg.cc/QC5vYhvt/Capture.jpg)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/flow/total_energy_2020.pdf
The man with the data. Exactly. And so far, I haven't heard "boo" about any new plans to start building power plants that could keep up.
Stupid liberals.
-
Of course it will be "cheaper!" Why do you suppose the Shortbus Administration is instituting polices that dramatically increase the price of fossil fuels? When gasoline hits $30 a gallon, electrics would look damned good by comparison.
-
The energy used in the transportation sector is double the entire delivered electric power system. They won't replace it just by charging from the off peak times.
(https://i.postimg.cc/QC5vYhvt/Capture.jpg)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/flow/total_energy_2020.pdf
Good information - thanks. Don't you think they will build more capacity of there is more demand?
-
The man with the data. Exactly. And so far, I haven't heard "boo" about any new plans to start building power plants that could keep up.
Stupid liberals.
@thackney is a TBR treasure when it comes to the economics of energy! We're lucky to have him.
-
Good information - thanks
I overstated that as double. The transportation energy input is more comparable to the energy input into the electrical system, rather than the delivered portion that I referenced. Still massive, but not double in hindsight.
-
Of course it will be "cheaper!" Why do you suppose the Shortbus Administration is instituting polices that dramatically increase the price of fossil fuels? When gasoline hits $30 a gallon, electrics would look damned good by comparison.
That may be the ultimate end-game.
-
I overstated that as double. The transportation energy input is more comparable to the energy input into the electrical system, rather than the delivered portion that I referenced. Still massive, but not double in hindsight.
@thackney - Given any increase in electric vehicles would be gradual, wouldn't the utilities just build more capacity as needed to meet the increased demand?
-
Good information - thanks. Don't you think they will build more capacity of there is more demand?
With free-market capitalism, yes. With government-controlled utilities, no.
-
@thackney - Given any increase in electric vehicles would be gradual, wouldn't the utilities just build more capacity as needed to meet the increased demand?
I think it will be more gradual than those pushing them realize. And your point of mostly charging at night is true as well; that increase the capacity factor, or better utilizes the base load power plants.
I think utilities will be able to serve the load growth. Mostly because the load growth is going to be relatively gradual.
Also, people are not just going to accept their current vehicles becoming worthless (people in general). The market is going to take time to cycle out the petroleum based vehicles. The economy cannot handle suddenly having that much personal property becoming "worthless". And the production volume of electric vehicles to meet that full demand is far away.
-
That may be the ultimate end-game.
Between $30/gas and operating permits/fees, like buying a class three rifle (full auto capable), and limiting the pool of vehicles and parts, yeah, an oxcart beats walking...
It isn't stopping you from traveling, just use your feet...
-
I overstated that as double. The transportation energy input is more comparable to the energy input into the electrical system, rather than the delivered portion that I referenced. Still massive, but not double in hindsight.
Won't we all have solar on our houses by then? Just semi-kidding as I have several friends that are putting them on their roofs.
-
Won't we all have solar on our houses by then? Just semi-kidding as I have several friends that are putting them on their roofs.
My neighbor spent $60,000 on a 17kW system. No batteries.
Even with the $27,000 tax credit, I see no way he breaks even in 20 years.
-
The man with the data. Exactly. And so far, I haven't heard "boo" about any new plans to start building power plants that could keep up.
Stupid liberals.
It is short way more than just power plants. The infrastructure to carry that newly generated power isn't there either. And that is no minor task by a long shot.
-
Well,DUHHHHHHH!
By the time they get through taxing gasoline and gasoline-powered cars and giving tax breaks to electric stuff,only the "Ferarri Class will be able to afford to drive gasoline autos,and they won't care about the additional costs because it will add to their "snob status" as "one of the privileged".
We all know how the goobermint works. They tax the hell out of what they ain't getting a cut of the profits from,and give federal subsidies to the businesses that "feed them" under the table.
-
Well,DUHHHHHHH!
By the time they get through taxing gasoline and gasoline-powered cars and giving tax breaks to electric stuff,only the "Ferarri Class will be able to afford to drive gasoline autos,and they won't care about the additional costs because it will add to their "snob status" as "one of the privileged".
We all know how the goobermint works. They tax the hell out of what they ain't getting a cut of the profits from,and give federal subsidies to the businesses that "feed them" under the table.
Rest assured, the Auto companies will be doing their share of the feeding.
-
Where will all the additional electric power come from to power these cars?
@Kamaji
New powerplants built using your tax dollars and your monthly payments.
After all,where else are ya gonna get electricity?
BTW,I know of one golf course near a resort area that was sold a couple of years ago and turned into a solar farm,thanks to the subsidies/tax breaks. Last I heard,it is now up for sale and AFAIK,hasn't produced one silly kilowatt.
When was the last time any of YOU heard of a nice golf course going out of business in a resort area?
-
Fairy dust and unicorn farts will make all the electricity necessary to power the new electric cars........
@Joe Wooten
Well,it will,of course,be necessary to restrict the sale of electric cars due to the shortage of electricity,but people willing to move into new urban high rise "neighborhoods" where they can walk or catch an electric bus to work or shopping will get tax breaks to abandon their suburban home that they can't sell anyhow.
Funny how stuff like that works out,ain't it?
History has a way of repeating itself,and when I first went to Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union,there were still complete towns sitting empty outside of the suburban areas to big cities. The Soviets sent trucks and soldiers to the towns to help the people load up their possessions and move into the spiffy new 1 bath apartments in cement buildings.
I had Russian friends telling me it wasn't unusual to enter one of these "closed towns" and find houses with furniture,books,clothes and other possessions still in place because the former residents didn't have/weren't allowed the room to take it all with them,and were forbidden to ever return. I know of one Russian man that said he and his wife went "hunting" in them for antiques and other items to sell during the summer when they weren't teaching school. He said it wasn't even unusual to find antique gold and silver coins in the rural buildings because the peasants liked to hide their valuables under the hearth where the fires were. I sent the man plans to make his own metal detector,and he was over the moon with joy because since it was illegal for mere citizens to possess them,nobody in Russia had been manufacturing them but the military,and it was a crime to have one.
Coming soon to rural towns near you........
-
Exactly. Or pipe in oil from overseas to run those plants (since Biden killed our energy independence).
But I do think the extra electricity needed is a bit overstated - typically people charge cars in the evening, when the demand for electricity is lower. This actually lowers the ratio of peak to average power, which is a good thing for the power companies.
@BassWrangler
Maybe true now,but not in the Bold New Future. There will be charging stations in all public parking garages so people can charge their cars for the trip home. Providing,of course,that you can obtain a permit to own a car,and have enough money to pay to keep it charged.
-
The man with the data. Exactly. And so far, I haven't heard "boo" about any new plans to start building power plants that could keep up.
Stupid liberals.
@Kamaji
And you and everyone else is assuming the EPA will issue the permits to build them.
-
My neighbor spent $60,000 on a 17kW system. No batteries.
Even with the $27,000 tax credit, I see no way he breaks even in 20 years.
@thackney
Do me a favor and tell him I have some magic beans for sale that I will let go of for a VERY reasonable price if he acts soon!
-
Where will all the additional electric power come from to power these cars?
@Kamaji
Magic beans.
Wanna buy some? Contact me quickly,because they are going fast!
-
@BassWrangler
Maybe true now,but not in the Bold New Future. There will be charging stations in all public parking garages so people can charge their cars for the trip home. Providing,of course,that you can obtain a permit to own a car,and have enough money to pay to keep it charged.
That's a good point, @sneakypete . Tesla already has those chargers.
-
I overstated that as double. The transportation energy input is more comparable to the energy input into the electrical system, rather than the delivered portion that I referenced. Still massive, but not double in hindsight.
I read the chart the way you said it the first time @thackney - transportation demands twice as much energy as the electric system delivers. And what's worse, the electric system delivers only a third of the energy it takes in (I didn't realize conversion to electric and transmission had that kind of unfavorable thermodynamics - what am I missing?). Apparently we're going to save the planet by shifting to a less efficient overall energy delivery approach and having to produce even more energy.
-
@Kamaji
And you and everyone else is assuming the EPA will issue the permits to build them.
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm asking where's the process? Even if the EPA were to issue permits, it would take years just to get to the point of putting shovels in the dirt. The EPA would just slow that up even further.
That's my point: the process that has to happen for this amount of generating capacity to be available when needed - especially 2027 - simply hasn't even started, so this is a total bust. The headline only works if gasoline is pushed up to $30 or more a gallon.
-
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm asking where's the process? Even if the EPA were to issue permits, it would take years just to get to the point of putting shovels in the dirt. The EPA would just slow that up even further.
That's my point: the process that has to happen for this amount of generating capacity to be available when needed - especially 2027 - simply hasn't even started, so this is a total bust. The headline only works if gasoline is pushed up to $30 or more a gallon.
Distilled: They're lying again.
-
My neighbor spent $60,000 on a 17kW system. No batteries.
Even with the $27,000 tax credit, I see no way he breaks even in 20 years.
At 5%, you're looking at minimum $218/mo to recoup that investment. And that assumes zero maintenance costs.
-
My neighbor spent $60,000 on a 17kW system. No batteries.
Even with the $27,000 tax credit, I see no way he breaks even in 20 years.
You should see some of the horror stories I've seen regarding Tesla's solar roof. They give an estimate and a time frame, then come back and push the time frame back and at the same time jack up the price. Imagine if you were deciding between the Tesla product and more traditional solar panels, and you passed on some deal on the solar panels to wait for Tesla, and then they pull this crap.
Here's an article (https://electrek.co/2021/04/11/tesla-hikes-solar-roof-price-on-contracts-signed-over-a-year-ago) that discusses their bait-and-switch.
-
IOW, regulatory demands will artificially cause the cost of fossil fuels and vehicles to become out of reach (which they already are), and favorable subsidies will bring the cost of electric vehicles artificially low.
That is not 'market'. that is manipulation.
-
Distilled: They're lying again.
Their lips are moving, ain't they? :laugh:
-
At 5%, you're looking at minimum $218/mo to recoup that investment. And that assumes zero maintenance costs.
It also assumes zero failures over 20 years - which is highly unlikely.
-
I read the chart the way you said it the first time @thackney - transportation demands twice as much energy as the electric system delivers. And what's worse, the electric system delivers only a third of the energy it takes in (I didn't realize conversion to electric and transmission had that kind of unfavorable thermodynamics - what am I missing?). Apparently we're going to save the planet by shifting to a less efficient overall energy delivery approach and having to produce even more energy.
The efficiency of electrical generation plants vary. A nuke plant averages about 34%, a supercritical coal/gas fired steam plant about 45%, and a combined cycle gas fired plant about 60%. Almost all of the losses are thrown into the condenser. There are systems to get part of this energy, but the cost of installing them does not justify doing it. UT Austin had such a system installed in the campus power plant back when I was an engineering student there. A gas turbine blowing into a recovery boiler powering two MW steam turbines and then a freon boiler in the condenser neck that drove 4 or 5 freon turbines used to pump chilled or heated water all over campus. Total cycle efficiency ran about 65%.
-
The efficiency of electrical generation plants vary. A nuke plant averages about 34%, a supercritical coal/gas fired steam plant about 45%, and a combined cycle gas fired plant about 60%.
@Joe Wooten
I don't mind admitting I am more than a little shocked to learn that. I have always been under the impression that nuke plants were the most efficient,or why would nations spend so much money and take so many risks to build them?
Is this my fault for not having paid attention,or were we,the public,purposely misled about nuke power plants?
-
@Joe Wooten
I don't mind admitting I am more than a little shocked to learn that. I have always been under the impression that nuke plants were the most efficient,or why would nations spend so much money and take so many risks to build them?
Is this my fault for not having paid attention,or were we,the public,purposely misled about nuke power plants?
It is because there's a tremendous amount of energy in nuclear fuel even with the inefficiencies of converting it to electricity.
-
I read the chart the way you said it the first time @thackney - transportation demands twice as much energy as the electric system delivers. And what's worse, the electric system delivers only a third of the energy it takes in (I didn't realize conversion to electric and transmission had that kind of unfavorable thermodynamics - what am I missing?). Apparently we're going to save the planet by shifting to a less efficient overall energy delivery approach and having to produce even more energy.
It is mostly the conversion of thermal energy into electricity. Transmission, substation and distribution losses together are about 6.4% of the net generation or 2.4% of the total inputs.
(https://i.postimg.cc/SsM4c5Ff/Capture.jpg)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/flow-graphs/electricity.php
-
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm asking where's the process? Even if the EPA were to issue permits, it would take years just to get to the point of putting shovels in the dirt. The EPA would just slow that up even further.
That's my point: the process that has to happen for this amount of generating capacity to be available when needed - especially 2027 - simply hasn't even started, so this is a total bust. The headline only works if gasoline is pushed up to $30 or more a gallon.
Keep in mind we keep building power plants every year, just not coal plants anymore. Natural Gas is the biggest portion of the growth.
Electricity Net Generation: Total (All Sectors)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec7_5.pdf
1950-2020
-
At 5%, you're looking at minimum $218/mo to recoup that investment. And that assumes zero maintenance costs.
And that is based upon zero cost of maintenance?
-
@Joe Wooten
I don't mind admitting I am more than a little shocked to learn that. I have always been under the impression that nuke plants were the most efficient,or why would nations spend so much money and take so many risks to build them?
Is this my fault for not having paid attention,or were we,the public,purposely misled about nuke power plants?
No, it's neither anyone's fault or the utilities purposely misleading folks. Things like this are of interest only to thermodynamics geeks like me. The reason for this has to do with the temperatures and pressures the different types of plants operate at. Nuclear reactors operate with core temperatures of about 600F in order to provide safety margins for control. The steam exiting the reactors/steam generators is usually slightly wet saturated steam running about 750 to 1000 psia which equates to a temperature of 530F to 550 F. The once through B&W plants run superheated steam at 1000 psia and 580F. Supercritical fossil plants run on superheated steam at pressures of 4500 to 5000 psia at temperatures of about 1050F. SInce they all have about the same temperature at the condensers, the initial temperatures account for the difference in efficiencies.
Combines cycle plants have a gsas turbine that runs at about 30% to 35% efficiency using its exhaust to make steam at about 1000F and 2000 psia to run a steam turbine and their combined efficiencies give the best overall efficiency of any type of power generation. Given that there is no practical way to use the low grade heat dumped into the condenser causes the efficiency losses.
-
It is mostly the conversion of thermal energy into electricity. Transmission, substation and distribution losses together are about 6.4% of the net generation or 2.4% of the total inputs.
(https://i.postimg.cc/SsM4c5Ff/Capture.jpg)
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/flow-graphs/electricity.php
Many thanks @thackney and @Joe Wooten. My education was in chemistry, not engineering, so my understanding of these thermodynamics is nowhere near as advanced as either of yours. Your explanations really clarify that we use "the grid" simply as a convenient means of *distributing* energy and applying it at the final point of use; the energy originates elsewhere and converting it to that conveniently-distributable form is costly in fundamental terms. I suppose that's obvious to both of you but I had not thought of it clearly this way before. It makes me wonder about the real sustainability of initiatives to convert a point-of-use application (such as an automobile) from any other source to electric, and that's not even considering the problems that come with batteries.
OTOH I suppose an electric vehicle generates less waste heat than an internal combustion engine during that final conversion to kinetic energy, so maybe it's just a question of bookkeeping where the unavoidable losses occur. Is it possible that the 24 quadrillion BTUs consumed by transportation could be reduced if transportation were all done by electric vehicles, and would such a reduction be enough to pay the aggregate upstream penalty for converting to electricity?
-
Many thanks @thackney and @Joe Wooten. My education was in chemistry, not engineering, so my understanding of these thermodynamics is nowhere near as advanced as either of yours. Your explanations really clarify that we use "the grid" simply as a convenient means of *distributing* energy and applying it at the final point of use; the energy originates elsewhere and converting it to that conveniently-distributable form is costly in fundamental terms. I suppose that's obvious to both of you but I had not thought of it clearly this way before. It makes me wonder about the real sustainability of initiatives to convert a point-of-use application (such as an automobile) from any other source to electric, and that's not even considering the problems that come with batteries.
OTOH I suppose an electric vehicle generates less waste heat than an internal combustion engine during that final conversion to kinetic energy, so maybe it's just a question of bookkeeping where the unavoidable losses occur. Is it possible that the 24 quadrillion BTUs consumed by transportation could be reduced if transportation were all done by electric vehicles, and would such a reduction be enough to pay the aggregate upstream penalty for converting to electricity?
Electric vehicle generates much less waste heat. So much less that while a heater in a tradition car uses the waste heat for the inside cabin, the electric must turn on electric heaters and pull away more energy from the batteries.
-
Electric vehicle generates much less waste heat. So much less that while a heater in a tradition car uses the waste heat for the inside cabin, the electric must turn on electric heaters and pull away more energy from the batteries.
Having no experience with electric vehicles I did not know this fact; it lends some credence to the hypothesis that the at-point-of-use consumption of energy in transportation would be reduced if transportation were all by electric vehicles rather than ICE or diesel vehicles. But I still wonder how those numbers would add up against the conversion losses in generating all that electricity.
-
I'll never buy an EV. This old fashioned curmdugeon will have to have the steering wheell of his V8 truck pryed from his cold dead hands.
-
Having no experience with electric vehicles I did not know this fact; it lends some credence to the hypothesis that the at-point-of-use consumption of energy in transportation would be reduced if transportation were all by electric vehicles rather than ICE or diesel vehicles. But I still wonder how those numbers would add up against the conversion losses in generating all that electricity.
EVs convert over 77% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels. Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 12%–30% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evtech.shtml
But take the 77% and multiple by the ratio of (energy out divided by the energy in of the electrical power system) and we get
77% x (12.97 / 36.47) = 77% x 35.6% = 27.4%
Not surprising they have comparable efficiencies.
-
You should see some of the horror stories I've seen regarding Tesla's solar roof. They give an estimate and a time frame, then come back and push the time frame back and at the same time jack up the price. Imagine if you were deciding between the Tesla product and more traditional solar panels, and you passed on some deal on the solar panels to wait for Tesla, and then they pull this crap.
Here's an article (https://electrek.co/2021/04/11/tesla-hikes-solar-roof-price-on-contracts-signed-over-a-year-ago) that discusses their bait-and-switch.
Not to mention having a hail storm and having to have your shingles replaced. The solar must all come down and reinstalled...that can't be cheap.
-
I just realized they'll be cheaper by 2027 because with the Democraps in charge, gas will be $20/gallon.
-
I just realized they'll be cheaper by 2027 because with the Democraps in charge, gas will be $20/gallon.
When gasoline is $20/gal, solar panels will go up by a comparable amount because you will still need fossil fuels to make and install them. There is no free lunch
-
EVs convert over 77% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels. Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 12%–30% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evtech.shtml
But take the 77% and multiple by the ratio of (energy out divided by the energy in of the electrical power system) and we get
77% x (12.97 / 36.47) = 77% x 35.6% = 27.4%
Not surprising they have comparable efficiencies.
Many thanks for your continued insight @thackney; this is the overall comparison I was looking for. So it seems the relative merits of gasoline powered transportation versus electric powered transportation are *not* in the overall consumption of energy, but in the user's perception of performance, in the incremental infrastructure investment needed, and in the costs of materials for manufacturing the different technologies.
-
Electric vehicle generates much less waste heat. So much less that while a heater in a tradition car uses the waste heat for the inside cabin, the electric must turn on electric heaters and pull away more energy from the batteries.
...Which is the bugaboo at this latitude. "Fighting global warming" (AKA "climate change") is a double whammy, because, if effective, we'd be back to the months of zero for a high temperature and the batteries would have to work overtime to keep the cabin temperature survivable. As it is, with approximately 130 miles between major towns, just getting there (without any loiter time for impassable road conditions or mishaps), would be questionable, and a round trip would be out of the question with current tech.
I suppose it would spell the end of mass events, because the need for charging capacity at or near the venue would put a lot of load on a localized system.
-
Many thanks for your continued insight @thackney; this is the overall comparison I was looking for. So it seems the relative merits of gasoline powered transportation versus electric powered transportation are *not* in the overall consumption of energy, but in the user's perception of performance, in the incremental infrastructure investment needed, and in the costs of materials for manufacturing the different technologies.
(https://sacredcowchips.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/electric-car-cartoon-pictures.jpg)
-
When gasoline is $20/gal, solar panels will go up by a comparable amount because you will still need fossil fuels to make and install them. There is no free lunch
Not if they're made in China wink777
-
Electric vehicle generates much less waste heat. So much less that while a heater in a tradition car uses the waste heat for the inside cabin, the electric must turn on electric heaters and pull away more energy from the batteries.
Actually, the newer ones use heat pumps. My Tesla is before that change, and the heater is a big range reducer. On The newer ones with the heat pump, that's much less if an issue.
-
Actually, the newer ones use heat pumps. My Tesla is before that change, and the heater is a big range reducer. On The newer ones with the heat pump, that's much less if an issue.
Thanks for that update. I understand heat pumps work well when there is not a drastic difference in temperature. I wonder if they also have resistive type heaters for temperature extremes; my parents home in Ohio does that when the heat pump won't keep up.
-
Thanks for that update. I understand heat pumps work well when there is not a drastic difference in temperature. I wonder if they also have resistive type heaters for temperature extremes; my parents home in Ohio does that when the heat pump won't keep up.
When they take these to Antarctica or the North Pole and survive extensive travel with them, maybe I will consider one for home use in North Dakota.
-
Many thanks for your continued insight @thackney; this is the overall comparison I was looking for. So it seems the relative merits of gasoline powered transportation versus electric powered transportation are *not* in the overall consumption of energy, but in the user's perception of performance, in the incremental infrastructure investment needed, and in the costs of materials for manufacturing the different technologies.
Don't forget another important variable, convenience. With a gas powered vehicle you don't have to schedule lengthy recharging stops on a long trip. Last year I drove over 900 miles straight through with just minutes needed for refueling, let me know when I can do that in an EV.
-
Don't forget another important variable, convenience. With a gas powered vehicle you don't have to schedule lengthy recharging stops on a long trip. Last year I drove over 900 miles straight through with just minutes needed for refueling, let me know when I can do that in an EV.
Well... You "can" do it with EVs too... Just like the pony express did it with horses...
-
Well... You "can" do it with EVs too... Just like the pony express did it with horses...
What a great leap forward. *****rollingeyes*****
-
When they take these to Antarctica or the North Pole and survive extensive travel with them, maybe I will consider one for home use in North Dakota.
I heard that.
-
Don't forget another important variable, convenience. With a gas powered vehicle you don't have to schedule lengthy recharging stops on a long trip. Last year I drove over 900 miles straight through with just minutes needed for refueling, let me know when I can do that in an EV.
I am still surprised that there is not an effort to have a small generator/trailer available to rent that would charge the car for long driving events like a vacation trip. Something you may only want once a year.
-
Actually bigger problem is that it takes all night to charge one of these things.
-
Actually bigger problem is that it takes all night to charge one of these things.
Bigger yet is all night to find out it did NOT charge.
-
Bigger yet is all night to find out it did NOT charge.
As all owners of cell phones, we know that'll never happen right? :cool:
-
As all owners of cell phones, we know that'll never happen right? :cool:
And in the coming future, it does charge overnight, then the utility decides it needs that power back more than you do.
Could Car Batteries Back up Our Electrical Grid?
https://www.designnews.com/could-car-batteries-back-our-electrical-grid-0
-
Actually bigger problem is that it takes all night to charge one of these things.
Do you prefer one that charges in 5 min? Consider how much power that will take and how much energy passes through that connection in just 5 minutes time. I wouldn't want to be standing anywhere near that.
Think cellphone lithium battery fire - times ten million.
-
Actually bigger problem is that it takes all night to charge one of these things.
well that's not true. When I get home from work, I plug in my Tesla, and it’s typically charged in 50 minutes. Now my workplace is only 30 minutes from my house, but the way the charging works, it's slower as you get closer to fully charged.
If I am on a road trip, I charge at a SuperCharger, and depending on how much charge I need to get to the next one, it will be somewhere between 10 minutes and 30 minutes to charge. I typically go get a coffee or something to eat.
-
Do you prefer one that charges in 5 min? Consider how much power that will take and how much energy passes through that connection in just 5 minutes time. I wouldn't want to be standing anywhere near that.
Think cellphone lithium battery fire - times ten million.
Yeah, and gasoline is perfectly safe and nothing bad ever happens from it. There are some kinks to be certain in electric vehicles, but they'll grow in acceptance and the kinks will be worked out over time.
-
well that's not true. When I get home from work, I plug in my Tesla, and it’s typically charged in 50 minutes. Now my workplace is only 30 minutes from my house, but the way the charging works, it's slower as you get closer to fully charged.
If I am on a road trip, I charge at a SuperCharger, and depending on how much charge I need to get to the next one, it will be somewhere between 10 minutes and 30 minutes to charge. I typically go get a coffee or something to eat.
Interesting, I did not know that. They might be more feasible then.
-
Interesting, I did not know that. They might be more feasible then.
Even the low end ones are practical for most people's daily commute. If you're wealthy enough to be a 2 or more car family, having one electric and the other(s) gasoline is often a good option. I am working from home these days, but when I was commuting, I loved driving my Tesla there.
-
Even the low end ones are practical for most people's daily commute. If you're wealthy enough to be a 2 or more car family, having one electric and the other(s) gasoline is often a good option. I am working from home these days, but when I was commuting, I loved driving my Tesla there.
Meanwhile, I am faced with replacing a battery on my 2009 hybrid with <30,000 miles. It's been a year since the warranty on the battery expired, so I'll be out $11-12,000. Despite the cost, it's much cheaper than buying a new non-electric car. I'll never buy another vehicle that's in any way "electric."
-
Meanwhile, I am faced with replacing a battery on my 2009 hybrid with <30,000 miles. It's been a year since the warranty on the battery expired, so I'll be out $11-12,000. Despite the cost, it's much cheaper than buying a new non-electric car. I'll never buy another vehicle that's in any way "electric."
12k will buy you into the hella nice used section. low-side, I suppose, but you're there...
-
Meanwhile, I am faced with replacing a battery on my 2009 hybrid with <30,000 miles. It's been a year since the warranty on the battery expired, so I'll be out $11-12,000. Despite the cost, it's much cheaper than buying a new non-electric car. I'll never buy another vehicle that's in any way "electric."
I would like to learn more about that, if you are so inclined.
-
Meanwhile, I am faced with replacing a battery on my 2009 hybrid with <30,000 miles. It's been a year since the warranty on the battery expired, so I'll be out $11-12,000. Despite the cost, it's much cheaper than buying a new non-electric car. I'll never buy another vehicle that's in any way "electric."
Do you know this YouTuber, ChrisFix? He has a video showing replacement of a battery in a Prius. It's very straightforward and saves a ton of money.
I'm not a fan of hybrids. It's the worst of both worlds.
-
Meanwhile, I am faced with replacing a battery on my 2009 hybrid with <30,000 miles. It's been a year since the warranty on the battery expired, so I'll be out $11-12,000. Despite the cost, it's much cheaper than buying a new non-electric car. I'll never buy another vehicle that's in any way "electric."
Unless you love the car, it's cheaper to ditch and go used. Or save a little then go "new".
-
I would like to learn more about that, if you are so inclined.
I wonder if a guy with the right smarts could rebuild them... It's got to be a bunch of l-ion packs paralleled together...
My current side-hustle project is putting together an electric trike on a Schwinn Meridian platform. Most of it is a kit (front wheel motor), but I think I am going to make the battery pack.
same thing, in micro... :shrug:
-
@Cyber Liberty
https://youtu.be/Q3RCdrh666w
-
@Cyber Liberty
https://youtu.be/Q3RCdrh666w
Thanks. That was fun... And answered my question as to rebuild-ability. :beer:
-
I would like to learn more about that, if you are so inclined.
Sure! Ask away!
-
Unless you love the car, it's cheaper to ditch and go used. Or save a little then go "new".
I love the car, other than the hybrid part. It's a 2009 Ford Escape with low, low mileage. It was my commuter car back in Phoenix, about 1 mile each way, hence the low mileage. I don't like buying somebody else's problems, so it would cost me $40-50K to replace it. I would get next to zero for a trade-in for a broken car.
My attitude with cars has generally been to buy them new and drive the wheels off.
-
I love the car, other than the hybrid part. It's a 2009 Ford Escape with low, low mileage. It was my commuter car back in Phoenix, about 1 mile each way, hence the low mileage. I don't like buying somebody else's problems, so it would cost me $40-50K to replace it. I would get next to zero for a trade-in for a broken car.
My attitude with cars has generally been to buy them new and drive the wheels off.
But you're a redneck now... Out in the boonies.
I'm telling you, you need a jeep. Or a pickup.The whole countryside will be open to you.
Jussayin.
-
But you're a redneck now... Out in the boonies.
I'm telling you, you need a jeep. Or a pickup.The whole countryside will be open to you.
Jussayin.
A pickumup is worthy of consideration if the battery replacement turns out to be problematic. I think there is a problem with the Powertrain Control Module, and that could be made of Unobtainium. The chip crunch is pretty bad in automotive.
-
A pickumup is worthy of consideration if the battery replacement turns out to be problematic. I think there is a problem with the Powertrain Control Module, and that could be made of Unobtainium. The chip crunch is pretty bad in automotive.
Yeah... Find a restored pre-computer pickup or jeep. Easy to work on. Easy to fix in the field... And it will probably last your whole life if it was a good rebuild to start with. Around here, a restored 73-85 Chevy is way under $20k... Last one I saw was down to $10.5, and that seemed kinda spendy.
I am cutting up a 2T grain truck for my next one. Cummins diesel, military axles... It will be a monster. and it will very likely be my last.
-
A pickumup is worthy of consideration
Do you think you could talk Mrs. Slippy into overlanding? Or does that mean a air-conditioned 22' camper? Lots and lots of fun in that game.
-
I love the car, other than the hybrid part. It's a 2009 Ford Escape with low, low mileage. It was my commuter car back in Phoenix, about 1 mile each way, hence the low mileage. I don't like buying somebody else's problems, so it would cost me $40-50K to replace it. I would get next to zero for a trade-in for a broken car.
My attitude with cars has generally been to buy them new and drive the wheels off.
What is the cost of buying the batteries yourself?
-
Were I in your shoes, @Cyber Liberty, I'd be tempted to ditch that hybrid and get a truck. As soon as my wife and I can escape the Seattle area and move back southeast, I'll be buying a pick-up truck again. It's just not very practical with my tiny garage and no driveway.
But then again, with gas prices headed for stratospheric levels, maybe the hybrid is not a bad option for the next 4 years.
-
What is the cost of buying the batteries yourself?
Last time I checked, about $10K.
-
Were I in your shoes, @Cyber Liberty, I'd be tempted to ditch that hybrid and get a truck. As soon as my wife and I can escape the Seattle area and move back southeast, I'll be buying a pick-up truck again. It's just not very practical with my tiny garage and no driveway.
But then again, with gas prices headed for stratospheric levels, maybe the hybrid is not a bad option for the next 4 years.
Since I am retired now, I resist buying another new vehicle, and I am not a fan of buying used. :shrug:
-
Last time I checked, about $10K.
For that price, if you can afford it, it's time to sell it and get something new.
-
For that price, if you can afford it, it's time to sell it and get something new.
Therein lies the rub. If I were still working, I'd have done that by now.
-
Last time I checked, about $10K.
I suggest checking elsewhere, if the battery is the only real problem. I started searching after I asked.
$2149.00
https://www.besthybridbatteries.com/products/ford-escape-2005-2009-hybrid-battery
https://www.besthybridbatteries.com/locations
-
I am still surprised that there is not an effort to have a small generator/trailer available to rent that would charge the car for long driving events like a vacation trip. Something you may only want once a year.
I had posted about a French start up that wants to do something just like that, the have a trailer with a generator that is plugged into the EV and adds and additional 350 - 450(I don't recall) so that EV owners can be just like ICE owners as far as range :silly: :silly:
-
I had posted about a French start up that wants to do something just like that, the have a trailer with a generator that is plugged into the EV and adds and additional 350 - 450(I don't recall) so that EV owners can be just like ICE owners as far as range :silly: :silly:
Sounds like a job for U-Haul :laugh:
-
I had posted about a French start up that wants to do something just like that, the have a trailer with a generator that is plugged into the EV and adds and additional 350 - 450(I don't recall) so that EV owners can be just like ICE owners as far as range :silly: :silly:
I do not get the silly aspect of the concept. Many owners would only need that a few times a year. My needs are far more often.
-
I had posted about a French start up that wants to do something just like that, the have a trailer with a generator that is plugged into the EV and adds and additional 350 - 450(I don't recall) so that EV owners can be just like ICE owners as far as range :silly: :silly:
(https://i.imgur.com/VRZJkxD.jpg)
-
I suggest checking elsewhere, if the battery is the only real problem. I started searching after I asked.
$2149.00
https://www.besthybridbatteries.com/products/ford-escape-2005-2009-hybrid-battery
https://www.besthybridbatteries.com/locations
The downside of a DIY battery replacement is the inherent danger of installing a 300V battery. I value my life more than the car. Plus, a battery in a hybrid is not a plug and play operation...the entire computer system would require retuning. Here in the Desert a car has to be very reliable and I'd be afraid of that even if the replacement process went well.
I am not a mechanic (worked on my last car in the 70's), and I don't trust the shade-tree guys with a technology still as rare as this. IOW, the added cost is worth it to me.
ETA: It's likely not just the battery. OBD says I should replace the in-tank fuel pump, and the PCM was throwing errors before the battery died.
-
The downside of a DIY battery replacement is the inherent danger of installing a 300V battery. I value my life more than the car. Plus, a battery in a hybrid is not a plug and play operation...the entire computer system would require retuning. Here in the Desert a car has to be very reliable and I'd be afraid of that even if the replacement process went well.
I am not a mechanic (worked on my last car in the 70's), and I don't trust the shade-tree guys with a technology still as rare as this. IOW, the added cost is worth it to me.
ETA: It's likely not just the battery. OBD says I should replace the in-tank fuel pump, and the PCM was throwing errors before the battery died.
You need a redneck friend with know-how. After watching the vid upthread, replacing that battery is not scary to me at all. And there is somebody down there that has done it a few times.
See, a buddy like me, you could get that done in an evening of planning and a light weekend of doing. For little more than beer and pizza. All you need is a friend like that, and occupational knowledge that makes reciprocation a reliable predictability. Swapping favors according to abilities.
That's how it's done in the country.
-
https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2021/05/11/now-its-cnn-electric-cars-could-wipe-out-this-species-n389095
Electric vehicles can’t happen without lithium — and a lot of it. Lithium is a critical mineral in the batteries that power electric vehicles. The world will need to mine 42 times as much lithium as was mined in 2020 if we will meet the climate goals set by the Paris Agreement, according to the International Energy Agency. Existing mines and projects under construction will meet only half the demand for lithium in 2030, the agency said.
The United States has only one active lithium mine today. The country will need 500,000 metric tons of lithium carbonate equivalent by 2030, according to research by RK Equity, a New York firm that advises investors on lithium. The entire global lithium carbonate equivalent market last year was 325,000 metric tons, RK Equity partner Howard Klein told CNN Business.
More at the link
-
The downside of a DIY battery replacement is the inherent danger of installing a 300V battery. I value my life more than the car. Plus, a battery in a hybrid is not a plug and play operation...the entire computer system would require retuning. Here in the Desert a car has to be very reliable and I'd be afraid of that even if the replacement process went well.
I am not a mechanic (worked on my last car in the 70's), and I don't trust the shade-tree guys with a technology still as rare as this. IOW, the added cost is worth it to me.
ETA: It's likely not just the battery. OBD says I should replace the in-tank fuel pump, and the PCM was throwing errors before the battery died.
Our White Glove Service provides a convenient and hassle-free method for premium hybrid battery installation service at a network of qualified repair centers across The United States. Charges can vary based on location and vehicle type and may range between $199 and $399 in certain locations.
https://www.besthybridbatteries.com/pages/white-glove-installs
I found 5 locations within 100 miles of your area. 3 in Henderson and 2 in Las Vegas
-
Yeah, and gasoline is perfectly safe and nothing bad ever happens from it. There are some kinks to be certain in electric vehicles, but they'll grow in acceptance and the kinks will be worked out over time.
@Weird Tolkienish Figure
And what are a few human sacrifices if they help the Fatherland in the Long run/Long March,right?
-
I am still surprised that there is not an effort to have a small generator/trailer available to rent that would charge the car for long driving events like a vacation trip. Something you may only want once a year.
I have trouble seeing how towing a generator (ICE) and powering the car from that is more efficient than just running the ICE. Then there is the problem with an extra running engine and fuel if there is an accident. Considering the distances between major towns here run about 130 miles, in winter, the trailer would be a must for intended trips (gotta run the heater/defroster too), and in winter driving the average person with a trailer is a professional or in the ditch...
If it isn't broke don't 'fix' it.
-
I have trouble seeing how towing a generator (ICE) and powering the car from that is more efficient than just running the ICE. Then there is the problem with an extra running engine and fuel if there is an accident. Considering the distances between major towns here run about 130 miles, in winter, the trailer would be a must for intended trips (gotta run the heater/defroster too), and in winter driving the average person with a trailer is a professional or in the ditch...
If it isn't broke don't 'fix' it.
Ah. And there’s a physics problem here.
There is no such thing as free energy.
Unless the generator is being used in conjunction with the braking system for drag there’s no advantage. On flat or uphill there is still that drag. The energy needed to turn over the generator comes from the car. Considering the efficiency of the generator and the efficiency of the battery/motor in the vehicle the cycle robs energy, not gaining energy.
It’s like hooking up a generator to a motor the produce energy for the motor. It doesn't work.
-
Ah. And there’s a physics problem here.
There is no such thing as free energy.
Unless the generator is being used in conjunction with the braking system for drag there’s no advantage. On flat or uphill there is still that drag. The energy needed to turn over the generator comes from the car. Considering the efficiency of the generator and the efficiency of the battery/motor in the vehicle the cycle robs energy, not gaining energy.
It’s like hooking up a generator to a motor the produce energy for the motor. It doesn't work.
@Smokin Joe
It was only suggested for extended range for very occassional use for the owner who already decided to own the electric vehicle. I made no claims of efficiency, it is only for range and not normal use.
I would not have it; I will always have ICE vehicle. But for those that choose the electric as their only vehicle (and there are quite a few now), it seems this market already exists.
I suppose you can just rent a regular car for such a trip, but I would hope the trailer generator would be far cheaper. The engine would certainly be much smaller.
-
@Smokin Joe
It was only suggested for extended range for very occassional use for the owner who already decided to own the electric vehicle. I made no claims of efficiency, it is only for range and not normal use.
I would not have it; I will always have ICE vehicle. But for those that choose the electric as their only vehicle (and there are quite a few now), it seems this market already exists.
I suppose you can just rent a regular car for such a trip, but I would hope the trailer generator would be far cheaper. The engine would certainly be much smaller.
I can understand that it looks like something that might work but the only energy source in the generator/vehicle system is the battery in the car. It takes energy to turn over a generator. One cannot get more energy out than what goes in. No different than towing a wind turbine. I’ve heard that one suggested a while back.
Even if all components in the towed generator idea is at 100% efficiency energy out cannot exceed energy in.
-
I can understand that it looks like something that might work but the only energy source in the generator/vehicle system is the battery in the car. It takes energy to turn over a generator. One cannot get more energy out than what goes in. No different than towing a wind turbine. I’ve heard that one suggested a while back.
Even if all components in the towed generator idea is at 100% efficiency energy out cannot exceed energy in.
Unless the generator was fuel-powered and supplied from an on-board fuel tank. Then the question would become the efficiency of burning that fuel directly in an ICE versus converting it to electricity and powering motion electrically. In theory the generator-supplied power could even go directly to motion, not to the vehicle's battery, similar to a diesel electric locomotive.
I'm not suggesting that this is a good idea, only that it's a possible idea.
-
I can understand that it looks like something that might work but the only energy source in the generator/vehicle system is the battery in the car. It takes energy to turn over a generator. One cannot get more energy out than what goes in. No different than towing a wind turbine. I’ve heard that one suggested a while back.
Even if all components in the towed generator idea is at 100% efficiency energy out cannot exceed energy in.
Generators run on fuel. I mean a trailer with a fueled generator that you put gasoline or diesel into to get the extended range. The only connection to vehicle is the tow bar and the electric cable to charge the vehicle batteries.
No magic was implied.
-
Generators run on fuel. I mean a trailer with a fueled generator that you put gasoline or diesel into to get the extended range. The only connection to vehicle is the tow bar and the electric cable to charge the vehicle batteries.
No magic was implied.
I understood what you were getting at, and how it would work to extend range of the existing EV, I'm really just considering (aside from efficiency problems which would take back seat to, say, getting to Mayo to be with a relative or some such when the weather was wrong for flying) that this would imply that there would be times when the roads would be populated by even a small fraction of people not used to pulling trailers, who would be doing so with an EV, not an F250, and who would be pulling not just a trailer, but one with a live and hot (thermally) running engine and generator with fuel supply on board. The potential for catastrophe is present, in so many ways.
'Amateur hour' on steroids...
-
I understood what you were getting at, and how it would work to extend range of the existing EV, I'm really just considering (aside from efficiency problems which would take back seat to, say, getting to Mayo to be with a relative or some such when the weather was wrong for flying) that this would imply that there would be times when the roads would be populated by even a small fraction of people not used to pulling trailers, who would be doing so with an EV, not an F250, and who would be pulling not just a trailer, but one with a live and hot (thermally) running engine and generator with fuel supply on board. The potential for catastrophe is present, in so many ways.
'Amateur hour' on steroids...
You make good points. Probably for the electric car owner (not you or I), renting another car with a regular engine makes more sense.
-
I can understand that it looks like something that might work but the only energy source in the generator/vehicle system is the battery in the car. It takes energy to turn over a generator. One cannot get more energy out than what goes in. No different than towing a wind turbine. I’ve heard that one suggested a while back.
Even if all components in the towed generator idea is at 100% efficiency energy out cannot exceed energy in.
@Smokin Joe @Potluck
Maybe I am wrong,but MY guess what Smoking Joe made the suggestion with the assumption that the wheels on the trailer would be turning a generator mounted to the trailer that charges the battery in the trailer and the battery in the electric car once the trailer battery is at full charge. Assuming of course that it would ever be at full charge while operating.
Seems like a simple enough concept to me. You can even adjust the charge rate by changing the height of the tires. Shorter tires mean more RPM's turned by the wheels resulting in a higher charging rate,and taller tires mean fewer tire RPM's/slower charging rate.
Sure,chances are it wouldn't be practical to own for most people that aren't traveling salesmen types,but I sure would like to own a franchise renting them out to vacationers and similar users.
-
Then it’s back to MPG
How much fossil fuel needed to produce the energy to go a certain amount of miles further.
Depending on the load a generator can be a real gas guzzler.
-
You make good points. Probably for the electric car owner (not you or I), renting another car with a regular engine makes more sense.
@thackney
You are assuming,of course,that there will still be gasoline powered cars being manufactured to be sold to rental companies.
That is NOT going to happen. Within 20 years or so it will be illegal to own and operate a gasoline powered anything. Ford just announced they were be offering a battery powered Mustang next year,and I THINK it was GM that has already announced a date in the not so distant future when they will ONLY be manufacturing electric vehicles.
Nope,the simplest and best solution is my idea of a tow behind cart with a generator powered by the cart/trailer wheels when they are turning to spin the generator to charge the batteries in both the trailer/cart as needed. It's such a simple idea I can't understand why it wouldn't be obvious to everyone. The cart/trailer is going to be towed behind the driven car and the wheels will be turning anyhow,so why not have them spin a generator while they are turning?
If I were smart enough,I would patent this idea.
-
@thackney
You are assuming,of course,that there will still be gasoline powered cars being manufactured to be sold to rental companies.
That is NOT going to happen. Within 20 years or so it will be illegal to own and operate a gasoline powered anything.
I will bet my own money your are wrong on that. Way, way too many will not accept that and far to many won't have the ability to live with it for the application. Lots of work trucks and the like.
Ford just announced they were be offering a battery powered Mustang next year,and I THINK it was GM that has already announced a date in the not so distant future when they will ONLY be manufacturing electric vehicles.
Nope,the simplest and best solution is my idea of a tow behind cart with a generator powered by the cart/trailer wheels when they are turning to spin the generator to charge the batteries in both the trailer/cart as needed. It's such a simple idea I can't understand why it wouldn't be obvious to everyone. The cart/trailer is going to be towed behind the driven car and the wheels will be turning anyhow,so why not have them spin a generator while they are turning?
If I were smart enough,I would patent this idea.
You're joking I hope. Turning the wheels to turn a generator requires more energy in torque than the generator can put out. Same concept of mounting a wind generator on top of the car.
Politicians aside, 1st law of thermodynamics still applies. tanstaafl
-
@thackney
You are assuming,of course,that there will still be gasoline powered cars being manufactured to be sold to rental companies.
That is NOT going to happen. Within 20 years or so it will be illegal to own and operate a gasoline powered anything. Ford just announced they were be offering a battery powered Mustang next year,and I THINK it was GM that has already announced a date in the not so distant future when they will ONLY be manufacturing electric vehicles.
Nope,the simplest and best solution is my idea of a tow behind cart with a generator powered by the cart/trailer wheels when they are turning to spin the generator to charge the batteries in both the trailer/cart as needed. It's such a simple idea I can't understand why it wouldn't be obvious to everyone. The cart/trailer is going to be towed behind the driven car and the wheels will be turning anyhow,so why not have them spin a generator while they are turning?
If I were smart enough,I would patent this idea.
Even if all components in the towed generator idea is at 100% efficiency energy out cannot exceed energy in.
Simple physics. Conservation of energy. In this world energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
Again, the only energy source in a towed generator system that gets it's energy to turn the wheels in the first place is the battery in the car. There is no other power source.
-
I will bet my own money your are wrong on that. Way, way too many will not accept that and far to many won't have the ability to live with it for the application. Lots of work trucks and the like.
You're joking I hope. Turnhaing the wheels to turn a generator requires more energy in torque than the generator can put out. Same concept of mounting a wind generator on top of the car.
Politicians aside, 1st law of thermodynamics still applies. tanstaafl
@thackney
You are assuming the trailer-mounted generator will be the sole source of power. It's won't. It will just make the batteries remain charged longer,resulting in longer drives before having to stop to recharge at a charging station.
Think of it like a "energy overdrive" that puts less stress on the batteries that power the car.
-
@thackney
You are assuming the trailer-mounted generator will be the sole source of power. It's won't. It will just make the batteries remain charged longer,resulting in longer drives before having to stop to recharge at a charging station.
Think of it like a "energy overdrive" that puts less stress on the batteries that power the car.
Om my gosh Pete, stop. You cannot generate energy from nothing. The generator tied to wheels turning cannot generator more power that whatever is making the wheels turn.
Every mechanical and electrical system has power losses. Anything added to the load/torque that takes power to make power is a net loss.
-
(http://www.coyoteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/keynes2.png)
-
To ban gasoline powered energy sources another power source needs to be found. Lithium Ion batteries are not the answer due to the fact there is already a shortage in mining.
We would have to double the current global supply of all lithium just to supply the US alone. The environmentalists are already up in arms about the prospect of additional mining and to top it all off we are not the dominate supplier of lithium. China is.
We are trying to raise a secondary power source (renewables) to the the status of a primary source. Fossil fuels.
-
(https://www.coyoteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/keynes2.png)
Spot on! :laugh:
-
Om my gosh Pete, stop. You cannot generate energy from nothing. The generator tied to wheels turning cannot generator more power that whatever is making the wheels turn.
Every mechanical and electrical system has power losses. Anything added to the load/torque that takes power to make power is a net loss.
I don't think @sneakypete is arguing for perpetual motion, that the wheels turning can keep the wheels turning; I think he's just suggesting that some wasted energy can be captured. @thackney I believe the reality is that using the wheels to generate additional power would draw more additional energy out of the battery than the wheel-generators would put back in.
-
And the weight of the generator itself needs consideration
-
Anyway,
There is a prospect gaining support and that’s switching out a depleted battery with a charged one to eliminate charge times. But again, the lithium shortage raises it’s ugly head.
-
Anyway,
There is a prospect gaining support and that’s switching out a depleted battery with a charged one to eliminate charge times. But again, the lithium shortage raises it’s ugly head.
IMO this, more than anything else, makes the entire vision of mass conversion to electric transportation merely an hallucination. Regardless of what governments or automakers say, it won't happen because it cannot happen.
-
IMO this, more than anything else, makes the entire vision of mass conversion to electric transportation merely an hallucination. Regardless of what governments or automakers say, it won't happen because it cannot happen.
I work for a gas detection manufacturer and we are feeling the crunch for lithium ion batteries. Both solar and wind need batteries for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. Add to that batteries don’t last forever and need replaced much like a battery in most cars.
-
I don't think @sneakypete is arguing for perpetual motion, that the wheels turning can keep the wheels turning; I think he's just suggesting that some wasted energy can be captured. @thackney I believe the reality is that using the wheels to generate additional power would draw more additional energy out of the battery than the wheel-generators would put back in.
There is no "wasted" energy to recover. Just the speed of the rotation is not the same as power. Every bit of power the generator would "recover" would be added torque to the wheels that has to be supplied by the drive wheels and its source of power.
I hear this argument a lot from people how don't understand the principles of power and energy. If just making it go round was enough and recovery power from a generator did not add load, I could put a 2 cc engine on a 100 MW generator.
Generators make the magnetic field that induces current in the wires via torque applied to the shaft. To get more power out, you have to put even more power in. Those systems all have losses so it is always a losing equation; something goes to heat in one way or another.
-
There is no "wasted" energy to recover. Just the speed of the rotation is not the same as power. Every bit of power the generator would "recover" would be added torque to the wheels that has to be supplied by the drive wheels and its source of power.
I hear this argument a lot from people how don't understand the principles of power and energy. If just making it go round was enough and recovery power from a generator did not add load, I could put a 2 cc engine on a 100 MW generator.
Generators make the magnetic field that induces current in the wires via torque applied to the shaft. To get more power out, you have to put even more power in. Those systems all have losses so it is always a losing equation; something goes to heat in one way or another.
Exactly
Think of it as pushing two magnets together that repel for a half cycle then for the other half cycle it's like pulling apart two magnets that are stuck together. The bigger the magnets (bigger generator) the more energy needed to to complete each cycle.
-
Om my gosh Pete, stop. You cannot generate energy from nothing. The generator tied to wheels turning cannot generator more power that whatever is making the wheels turn.
WTH kind of convoluted thinking is that,and WHERE did I make such a claim. It would serve as an auxiliary generator IN ADDITION to the generator mounted in the car.
I never once made the claim it would produce more electricity than the car needed,or even all the electricity it needed. Not once,although it is POSSIBLE that in the future battery technology as well as automotive technology might advance to the level it that supply could meet demands.
Anything added to the load/torque that takes power to make power is a net loss.
I guess the wheels don't turn in any tow trailer you design,but in THIS world,the wheels DO turn,regardless of if they are powering a generator or just rolling.
-
To ban gasoline powered energy sources another power source needs to be found. Lithium Ion batteries are not the answer due to the fact there is already a shortage in mining.
We would have to double the current global supply of all lithium just to supply the US alone. The environmentalists are already up in arms about the prospect of additional mining and to top it all off we are not the dominate supplier of lithium. China is.
We are trying to raise a secondary power source (renewables) to the the status of a primary source. Fossil fuels.
@Potluck
Well,that explains why the DNC is for it.
-
WTH kind of convoluted thinking is that,and WHERE did I make such a claim. It would serve as an auxiliary generator IN ADDITION to the generator mounted in the car.
There is no generator in the car. That is the whole reason I made this suggestion. There is only precharged batteries for power.
I never once made the claim it would produce more electricity than the car needed,or even all the electricity it needed. Not once,although it is POSSIBLE that in the future battery technology as well as automotive technology might advance to the level it that supply could meet demands.
Since the only supply is the batteries, there is no way to use the batteries to move the car, that moves the tires, that turns the generator, to charge the batteries.
I guess the wheels don't turn in any tow trailer you design,but in THIS world,the wheels DO turn,regardless of if they are powering a generator or just rolling.
Absolutely they turn, and turning at the same speed with a generator now attached, they apply torque to the wheel which creates resistance to the drive wheel, which adds load to the battery at some level greater than what the generator produces.
Generators require torque to produce power on the electrical wires. More power is more torque which is more load on whatever is making the wheels go round and round.
-
I guess the wheels don't turn in any tow trailer you design,but in THIS world,the wheels DO turn,regardless of if they are powering a generator or just rolling.
Here's a different way to think about it @sneakypete that might help. Train locomotives are diesel-electric; they have a diesel engine in them that drives an electric generator, and that electric generator drives an electric motor over each set of wheels, to turn the wheels. It's the electric motor, not the diesel engine, that turns the wheels. Under some circumstances a train engineer actually does what you are suggesting - he uses the rolling wheels of the locomotive to generate electricity; well he needs electricity to drive the train so that seems like a winner, right? But when he does this it's called dynamic braking, because it actually slows the train down. Using the motion of the rolling wheels to drive a generator makes it harder to turn the wheels so the train slows down.
If we used the turning wheels of a generator-trailer to generate more electricity, the trailer would suddenly become harder for the electric vehicle to pull, and it would drain the vehicle's battery more quickly than the wheel-powered generator could add power back into the battery. That's the reason no one has ever done it.
-
Here's a different way to think about it @sneakypete that might help. Train locomotives are diesel-electric; they have a diesel engine in them that drives an electric generator, and that electric generator drives an electric motor over each set of wheels, to turn the wheels. It's the electric motor, not the diesel engine, that turns the wheels. Under some circumstances a train engineer actually does what you are suggesting - he uses the rolling wheels of the locomotive to generate electricity; well he needs electricity to drive the train so that seems like a winner, right? But when he does this it's called dynamic braking, because it actually slows the train down. Using the motion of the rolling wheels to drive a generator makes it harder to turn the wheels so the train slows down.
If we used the turning wheels of a generator-trailer to generate more electricity, the trailer would suddenly become harder for the electric vehicle to pull, and it would drain the vehicle's battery more quickly than the wheel-powered generator could add power back into the battery. That's the reason no one has ever done it.
Easy-to-follow explanation. Thank you.
-
Easy-to-follow explanation. Thank you.
Thanks @Kamaji, but my explanation needs to be graded by Professor @thackney.
-
Thanks @Kamaji, but my explanation needs to be graded by Professor @thackney.
@HoustonSam
Absolutely correct Sam, the engineer understands but struggles to communicate with others.
-
There is no generator in the car. That is the whole reason I made this suggestion. There is only precharged batteries for power.
That's just insane. I realize there would be additional weight that would decrease the range,but the wheels on the car could be used to generate SOME electricity to make up for the "wheel drag" loss,and extend the range.
BTW,what ever happened to the idea of solar panels built into the top surfaces of the cars to capture solar energy? I know they aren't "the answer" either,but every little bit helps.
Since the only supply is the batteries, there is no way to use the batteries to move the car, that moves the tires, that turns the generator, to charge the battYeeries.
Absolutely they turn, and turning at the same speed with a generator now attached, they apply torque to the wheel which creates resistance to the drive wheel, which adds load to the battery at some level greater than what the generator produces.
Yes,but there should still be a net gain that would increase the range.
-
@HoustonSam
Absolutely correct Sam, the engineer understands but struggles to communicate with others.
That's why you have us ex-R&D Scientists who have been demoted to Management.
-
Here's a different way to think about it @sneakypete that might help. Train locomotives are diesel-electric; they have a diesel engine in them that drives an electric generator, and that electric generator drives an electric motor over each set of wheels, to turn the wheels. It's the electric motor, not the diesel engine, that turns the wheels. Under some circumstances a train engineer actually does what you are suggesting - he uses the rolling wheels of the locomotive to generate electricity; well he needs electricity to drive the train so that seems like a winner, right? But when he does this it's called dynamic braking, because it actually slows the train down. Using the motion of the rolling wheels to drive a generator makes it harder to turn the wheels so the train slows down.
Yes,but unlike trains,cars don't travel at maximum speed. They travel at roughly 60 MPH on average,and although I don't know what the top speed on the typical electric car is today,I am GUESSING it might be in the neighborhood of 100 mph on a fully-charged battery at sea level on a flat road. This means the system would be operating at 60 percent under typical driving conditions.
Which in turn would mean that a generator that is powered by the wheels that operates at 30 percent of the maximum power required could possibly put out half the power being lost by driving at 60 MPH.
That ain't nothing to sneeze about.
Granted,no big deal for city dwellers,but if you live in mostly rural and open states it could be a VERY big deal when it comes to the range you can drive between re-charging.
If we used the turning wheels of a generator-trailer to generate more electricity, the trailer would suddenly become harder for the electric vehicle to pull, and it would drain the vehicle's battery more quickly than the wheel-powered generator could add power back into the battery. That's the reason no one has ever done it.
Maybe that would be true IF the wheel-powered generator was the ONLY source of electrical power,but it wouldn't be.
-
Maybe that would be true IF the wheel-powered generator was the ONLY source of electrical power,but it wouldn't be.
Nor is it true for the diesel electric locomotive - he's still got his diesel engine running and generating electric power through the generator. But the train still slows down.
Regardless of the vehicle's speed, once you switch on that wheel-powered generator you're asking those rolling wheels to do additional work. You're basically driving while holding down the brakes.
-
That's just insane. I realize there would be additional weight that would decrease the range,but the wheels on the car could be used to generate SOME electricity to make up for the "wheel drag" loss,and extend the range.
No Pete, I am trying to politely, respectively explain it does not work that way.
What you describe is a perpetual motion machine.
In any power system, you can draw a box around a component or group of components and the power in must equal the power out or you have made a mistake in your calculation.
Just a wheel going round and round does not have any power that can be recovered without the power being taken from somewhere else.
BTW,what ever happened to the idea of solar panels built into the top surfaces of the cars to capture solar energy? I know they aren't "the answer" either,but every little bit helps.
Yes, that would help, but the quantity would be so microscopic compared to the power needed to move the vehicle to be meaningless. The small Tesla 3s have a 211 kW (283 hp) motor. The average solar panel produces 15 watts per square foot. If you put solar panels on a 8 foot wide trailer, it would need to 1/3 a mile long to produce that much power at peak.
Since the only supply is the batteries, there is no way to use the batteries to move the car, that moves the tires, that turns the generator, to charge the battYeeries.
That is how a fully electric car like the Tesla works. You charge the batteries first, then you get to drive the car depleting the battery charge. That is why their range is so limited compared to gasoline in the tank for energy.
Yes,but there should still be a net gain that would increase the range.
There is no power input to the system except what is supplied by the batteries. There can be no gain without an outside source of power. A generator running off the wheels pulled by the battery still needs the battery for power. It can only be a net loss, not a net gain.
-
Granted,no big deal for city dwellers,but if you live in mostly rural and open states it could be a VERY big deal when it comes to the range you can drive between re-charging.
Actually the range would be decreased in actual practice and doing mathematical gymnastics relies on a misinterpretation of the data presented.
Simple truth. If this worked it would already be in practice.
These kind of ideas have been on the internet since the beginning and I’ve never seen any of them work in the real world.
-
...Yes,but unlike trains,cars don't travel at maximum speed. They travel at roughly 60 MPH on average,and although I don't know what the top speed on the typical electric car is today,I am GUESSING it might be in the neighborhood of 100 mph on a fully-charged battery at sea level on a flat road. This means the system would be operating at 60 percent under typical driving conditions.
Which in turn would mean that a generator that is powered by the wheels that operates at 30 percent of the maximum power required could possibly put out half the power being lost by driving at 60 MPH.
Pete, it does not work that way.
The max power requirement is for acceleration, not speed. Trains are highly efficient because the they rarely stop and start. The majority of the travel is near constant speed. At speed, they only have to overcome friction and drag from the air. The engine works little at steady speed.
The same with a car. The motor has the ability to accelerate faster, but uses less power at steady speed. Adding something like a generator in a trailer adds "drag" requiring more output from the motor. Whatever the generator generates, the motor had to supply that power and more for the losses.
-
Actually the range would be decreased in actual practice and doing mathematical gymnastics relies on a misinterpretation of the data presented.
Simple truth. If this worked it would already be in practice.
These kind of ideas have been on the internet since the beginning and I’ve never seen any of them work in the real world.
Exactly. If one trailer/generator created a gain in power, string together a million of them and you could have tremendous power.
Except you could never make it move, and it is a loss, not a gain.
-
you could have tremendous power.
Except you could never make it move, and it is a loss, not a gain.
Sounds like Biden. 😁
-
Let's go back in time to the 1830s-40s-50s.
A very few farsighted men were experimenting with running railroad locomotives using not steam, but... electricity.
There was no "generated" electricity then, so they used the only devices they had to provide electrical current -- primitive batteries.
A few experimental engines were put together, and they all failed, due to the fact that the battery could not supply enough power, for long enough, to make the locomotive practical.
Then along came the dynamo, and with it a reliable source of constant power. The concept of "battery-powered" locomotives was quickly replaced by either a "third rail" or overhead power line that could keep the engine connected to a constant power supply.
Take a look at this:
(https://delawarebusinessnow.imgix.net/2018/05/0902379e800095e5.jpg?fm=pjpg&ixlib=php-1.2.1&s=f8686a13d7833504a68a6ad212b79871)
I ran this one many times.
See that red thing up on top?
It's called a "pantograph" and it's supplying the engine with 11,000 (or 25,000) volts, depending on where you are on the railroad.
So long as there's power in the wire, you keep going.
Now, how many here remember these things?
(https://c.stocksy.com/a/0rDA00/z9/2436538.jpg)
I recall they were a lot of fun.
What kept them going?
That thingamajig on the back that reached up and kept in contact with an overhead "screen".
THIS could be the answer to electric vehicles with "unlimited range", if someone wanted it to work and could design a practical "overhead" for through highways.
A car would still have a battery, of course, for roads where overhead power delivery was impractical. But get onto the freeway, raise "the pan", and the vehicle could run with "overhead power" and charge the battery at the same time.
Just dreamin', I guess...
-
No Pete, I am trying to politely, respectively explain it does not work that way.
What you describe is a perpetual motion machine.
No,I am NOT.
In any power system, you can draw a box around a component or group of components and the power in must equal the power out or you have made a mistake in your calculation.
Just a wheel going round and round does not have any power that can be recovered without the power being taken from somewhere else.
Ok,so how does a powerless hand cart roll down a hill?
-
That hand cart is actually not powerless. It contains gravitational potential energy.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/gpot.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/gpot.html)
Gravitational potential energy is energy an object possesses because of its position in a gravitational field. ... Since the force required to lift it is equal to its weight, it follows that the gravitational potential energy is equal to its weight times the height to which it is lifted. PE = kg x 9.8 m/s2 x m = joules.
-
Ok,so how does a powerless hand cart roll down a hill?
Gravity.
You charge that system pushing it up the hill. That is the source of potential energy to roll back down the hill.
No different than lifting a weight and letting it fall, just adding an hill and a wheel to the system.
-
You charge that system pushing it up the hill. That is the source of potential energy to roll back down the hill.
But @sneakypete, if you connect the wheels on that powerless hand cart to a generator and push the cart down the hill, the cart will roll more slowly to the bottom. Whatever energy you put into the hand cart by pushing it to the top of the hill is the only energy available to do anything while it's rolling back down the hill. If you divert some of that energy into running a generator then less of the energy will go into the handcart's forward motion. If the generator is large enough the cart won't roll at all, it will stay still on the slope of the hill.
The bottom line is that you can't create energy, you can only convert it from one form to another; every time you convert it some of it goes astray. If you want to get energy out of a moving vehicle by powering a generator with the vehicle's turning wheels, you can only get the energy to run the generator from the vehicle's engine, and the generator will create less energy than the engine puts into it. In your example case that engine is gravity.
A lot of folks have tried to beat this one for a long time, but it's like Supply and Demand in economics or gravity. It is what it is, and we can't beat it.
-
I will defend @sneakypete on this a little bit.
If the purpose is augmentation, in recognition that the power produced cannot exceed the power that made it, the idea is sound.
Imagine if you would a doghouse on the back of a pickup, or a trailer built for same... a camper. Let's say there are two 12v car batteries that live in the camper to provide conveniences....
Now I know those batteries can be recharged using the alternator on the truck, But let's say we build a simple frame to allow a bicycle wheel to run along the ground behind, and attach an alternator to that frame, belt-driven from the bicycle wheel.
After a couple days in the woods, and the batteries are low, dragging that little wheel along the ground on the way home would certainly (tend to) recharge the system passively... At a pittance to the truck.
-
In your "passive?" example you are actually drawing more energy from the truck's engine than if you would just wire those batteries to the truck's alternator.
-
I will defend @sneakypete on this a little bit.
If the purpose is augmentation, in recognition that the power produced cannot exceed the power that made it, the idea is sound.
Imagine if you would a doghouse on the back of a pickup, or a trailer built for same... a camper. Let's say there are two 12v car batteries that live in the camper to provide conveniences....
Now I know those batteries can be recharged using the alternator on the truck, But let's say we build a simple frame to allow a bicycle wheel to run along the ground behind, and attach an alternator to that frame, belt-driven from the bicycle wheel.
After a couple days in the woods, and the batteries are low, dragging that little wheel along the ground on the way home would certainly (tend to) recharge the system passively... At a pittance to the truck.
The energy still comes out of your gas tank (assuming the way home isn't all down hills...). And in all likelihood the alternator is more efficient than the wheel and the generator at recharging the battery. In other words, the wheel and generator will likely add slightly more drag than the alternator generating the same power. In fact the alternator is connected directly to the engine where as the wheel is being turned via the entire drive train which adds more losses before doing the added work.
Now... If the camp site were up a hill and you charged your battery with the external wheel generator coming back down the hill you really would charge your battery for free. Then you're taking advantage of the kinetic energy you added to your truck by increasing its elevation. The amount of energy going into your battery in that case reduces the amount of heat generated in your brakes/engine that was used to slow your truck down going back down the hill.
-
At a pittance to the truck.
But that pittance is still greater than 0, and it’s more than we put into the batteries, which is the point.
-
In your "passive?" example you are actually drawing more energy from the truck's engine than if you would just wire those batteries to the truck's alternator.
Incidental to the point, and I already admitted as much. Still it would work. And I do not know that the drag at the hitch is necessarily more than the drag at the crank... One would have to ponder gearing and momentum and free-wheeling... But that is not my intention. In the end you are running two alternators instead of one, and providing there is room in the output of the first alternator, efficiency would favor the single alternator anyway.
But if you had some reason to require charging away from the main system, surely it would serve the purpose to recharge the camper system. If that is what you mean to do, then fine.
I did something similar, running a crappy air compressor head off the wheel of my trailer. I wanted right-now air, and it served that purpose for years. Generally, I never had to start the gas engine on the compressor, because the passive system did enough. I eventually abandoned the idea when I moved the air onboard the truck... But it suited my purpose for a long time.
The point being if it suits your purpose, then fine... It is incidental to the truck anyway. The finer points don't matter.
-
The energy still comes out of your gas tank (assuming the way home isn't all down hills...). And in all likelihood the alternator is more efficient than the wheel and the generator at recharging the battery. In other words, the wheel and generator will likely add slightly more drag than the alternator generating the same power. In fact the alternator is connected directly to the engine where as the wheel is being turned via the entire drive train which adds more losses before doing the added work.
Now... If the camp site were up a hill and you charged your battery with the external wheel generator coming back down the hill you really would charge your battery for free. Then you're taking advantage of the kinetic energy you added to your truck by increasing its elevation. The amount of energy going into your battery in that case reduces the amount of heat generated in your brakes/engine that was used to slow your truck down going back down the hill.
Like I said above, there is quite a bit to consider there... gearing, momentum, free-wheeling, etc... And efficiency may not be what is desired. Maybe I want to to charge faster, and the weight on the truck charging system other than the camper might call for a dedicated system. I don't know why. Perhaps it is a poor example.
-
But that pittance is still greater than 0, and it’s more than we put into the batteries, which is the point.
Right. But I don't think that was @sneakypete 's point. I don't think he was saying there is free power there - In fact he denied that he was looking for perpetual motion.
To illustrate by absurdity, I know that if one were to daisy-chain several of those wheel driven alternators and could somehow feed the power they were making back into the engine driving the chain, eventually you would reach a point where the engine could not pull the chain. There is of a necessity, a diminishing return.
But I am not dealing with an absurdity. What I am doing is incidental to the truck - a pittance - and if it serves a purpose, then the benefit outweighs the cost.
-
I will defend @sneakypete on this a little bit.
If the purpose is augmentation, in recognition that the power produced cannot exceed the power that made it, the idea is sound.
Imagine if you would a doghouse on the back of a pickup, or a trailer built for same... a camper. Let's say there are two 12v car batteries that live in the camper to provide conveniences....
Now I know those batteries can be recharged using the alternator on the truck, But let's say we build a simple frame to allow a bicycle wheel to run along the ground behind, and attach an alternator to that frame, belt-driven from the bicycle wheel.
After a couple days in the woods, and the batteries are low, dragging that little wheel along the ground on the way home would certainly (tend to) recharge the system passively... At a pittance to the truck.
Just ascharging the batteries from the alternator would do so at a pittance to the truck without an additional mechanical system to maintain.
I have a couple of old headlight setups, new in the box, from Schwinn, to put on your bike to generate electricity to run an headlight and taillight. But anyone who ever put one on their bike can tell you, it took more effort to run that little generator than most folks wanted to add to just getting somewhere. I still think they're neat, and I like the idea of being able to make light without a fire of batteries, but recognize the trade off. The alternator's losses due to friction, to magnetic resistance while generating current, are a pittance to the engine, and you don't have to devise or maintain any additional systems in contact with the ground. Might as well mount an alternator on the headache rack with a fan and use that, if you want a separate system, but either way, that trifiling input will show up somewhere in the loss of MPG. The question is one of which system is most efficient overall, which has the least losses to friction, which has the least outlay of capital, and which is easiest to maintain.
-
Just ascharging the batteries from the alternator would do so at a pittance to the truck without an additional mechanical system to maintain.
Already answered. If there is cause for the mechanism, then the benefit outweighs the cost - I don't know what that cause is - Like I said, perhaps my example is poor. But just like that cheap compressor head (which I got for nothing) served a purpose keeping my air tank always full on my trailer, The pittance it cost to run it off the wheel of my trailer was worth it to me.
I have a couple of old headlight setups, new in the box, from Schwinn, to put on your bike to generate electricity to run an headlight and taillight. But anyone who ever put one on their bike can tell you, it took more effort to run that little generator than most folks wanted to add to just getting somewhere. I still think they're neat, and I like the idea of being able to make light without a fire of batteries, but recognize the trade off.
Sure - And I don't deny that. I recognize the trade-off. What, a horse or two running full out? A pittance against that Chevy.
The alternator's losses due to friction, to magnetic resistance while generating current, are a pittance to the engine, and you don't have to devise or maintain any additional systems in contact with the ground. Might as well mount an alternator on the headache rack with a fan and use that, if you want a separate system, but either way, that trifiling input will show up somewhere in the loss of MPG. The question is one of which system is most efficient overall, which has the least losses to friction, which has the least outlay of capital, and which is easiest to maintain.
Not necessarily. Perhaps the extra alternator means faster charging. Less miles to get a full charge back in the camper. And that ain't no small thing. Filling two dead batteries don't happen in a minute. Maybe you ain't going home, but on to the next camp, and that full charge means you don't have to haul out a jenny or set up solar. Is that worth letting a wheel down to double your output?
Maybe so.
-
No Pete, I am trying to politely, respectively explain it does not work that way.
What you describe is a perpetual motion machine.
No,I am NOT.
In any power system, you can draw a box around a component or group of components and the power in must equal the power out or you have made a mistake in your calculation.
Just a wheel going round and round does not have any power that can be recovered without the power being taken from somewhere else.
Ok,so how does a powerless hand cart roll down a hill?
A powerless handcart rolls down a hill because of gravity, which is exerting a net, unbalanced force on the handcart.
-
Right. But I don't think that was @sneakypete 's point. I don't think he was saying there is free power there - In fact he denied that he was looking for perpetual motion.
I don't want to put words in his mouth or mis-state his position, but I believe @sneakypete theorized that we can extend the range of an electric vehicle by using its turning wheels, or the wheels of an attached trailer, to power a generator and produce more electricity to power the vehicle. We cannot, it's impossible. We would draw more additional energy from the vehicle's battery to turn the wheels with the additional load of the wheel-powered generator than we would put back into the battery from that wheel-powered generator, consequently reducing the vehicle's range.
While no one intends to suggest perpetual motion in this thread, if we could extend the range of the vehicle this way, then we would extend it even further while driving through that additional range, and further still while driving through that next additional range, etc. We'd be getting more energy out of the system than had been put into the system, which is a definition of perpetual motion.
There are any number of ways we can draw power off a running engine or electric motor to re-charge batteries, run heaters, etc; no one is arguing that can't be done or that it's a bad idea. What we are saying is that all of those approaches, including re-charging the batteries that drive the vehicle, will reduce a vehicle's range between re-charging or fill-ups.
-
I don't want to put words in his mouth or mis-state his position, but I believe @sneakypete theorized that we can extend the range of an electric vehicle by using its turning wheels, or the wheels of an attached trailer, to power a generator and produce more electricity to power the vehicle. We cannot, it's impossible. We would draw more additional energy from the vehicle's battery to turn the wheels with the additional load of the wheel-powered generator than we would put back into the battery from that wheel-powered generator, consequently reducing the vehicle's range.
While no one intends to suggest perpetual motion in this thread, if we could extend the range of the vehicle this way, then we would extend it even further while driving through that additional range, and further still while driving through that next additional range, etc. We'd be getting more energy out of the system than had been put into the system, which is a definition of perpetual motion.
There are any number of ways we can draw power off a running engine or electric motor to re-charge batteries, run heaters, etc; no one is arguing that can't be done or that it's a bad idea. What we are saying is that all of those approaches, including re-charging the batteries that drive the vehicle, will reduce a vehicle's range between re-charging or fill-ups.
I took a test drive with an EV1 (back before they cancelled all the leases and crushed the cars), and they had a feature that used a generator from the wheels when you took your foot off the "gas" pedal as you approached a traffic signal. It slowed the car down without using the brakes, and pushed more charge into the battery. It was to help extend the range. I assume modern electrics have this feature.
The car had amazing low-end torque. It had a lot of power, but handled like a Chevette.
-
I took a test drive with an EV1 (back before they cancelled all the leases and crushed the cars), and they had a feature that used a generator from the wheels when you took your foot off the "gas" pedal as you approached a traffic signal. It slowed the car down without using the brakes, and pushed more charge into the battery. It was to help extend the range. I assume modern electrics have this feature.
The car had amazing low-end torque. It had a lot of power, but handled like a Chevette.
Exactly right. This is what improves the electric vehicles in stop and go city traffic. It takes energy to turn the generator. The more energy you try to take out of it, the harder it is to turn, the more it works like a brake in this example.
-
Exactly right. This is what improves the electric vehicles in stop and go city traffic. It takes energy to turn the generator. The more energy you try to take out of it, the harder it is to turn, the more it works like a brake in this example.
Which is exactly the same way a diesel/electric railroad engine slows the train without burning out the brakes.
-
I took a test drive with an EV1 (back before they cancelled all the leases and crushed the cars), and they had a feature that used a generator from the wheels when you took your foot off the "gas" pedal as you approached a traffic signal. It slowed the car down without using the brakes, and pushed more charge into the battery. It was to help extend the range. I assume modern electrics have this feature.
The car had amazing low-end torque. It had a lot of power, but handled like a Chevette.
No surprise this slowed the vehicle down. But the point in this thread is what I've highlighted - can the vehicle's range be extended this way? That is pete's theory and apparently what Cyber was told as well. For reasons I've tried to elaborate, I don't believe it.
-
No surprise this slowed the vehicle down. But the point in this thread is what I've highlighted - can the vehicle's range be extended this way? That is pete's theory and apparently what Cyber was told as well. For reasons I've tried to elaborate, I don't believe it.
I made no such claim. What I described really does extend the range, because it uses the potential energy of inertia that has to be overcome anyway to stop the car for a traffic signal to recharge the battery.
-
I made no such claim. What I described really does extend the range, because it uses the potential energy of inertia that has to be overcome anyway to stop the car for a traffic signal to recharge the battery.
Yeah I've tried to sort out how inertia would play into this. For the momentary period when the driver's foot is off the "gas" we are drawing minimally from the battery so wheel-generated power added back to the battery might be a net positive.
I suppose it depends on how we describe the cases for comparison. Capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle would certainly be better than not capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle, so for stop-start city driving I can see how one would argue the range is extended. But I would expect steady-speed highway driving to have a longer range than either of these stop-start cases, and that range to be impeded by continual recharging from wheel-generated incremental power.
-
I don't want to put words in his mouth or mis-state his position, but I believe @sneakypete theorized that we can extend the range of an electric vehicle by using its turning wheels, or the wheels of an attached trailer, to power a generator and produce more electricity to power the vehicle. We cannot, it's impossible. We would draw more additional energy from the vehicle's battery to turn the wheels with the additional load of the wheel-powered generator than we would put back into the battery from that wheel-powered generator, consequently reducing the vehicle's range.
While no one intends to suggest perpetual motion in this thread, if we could extend the range of the vehicle this way, then we would extend it even further while driving through that additional range, and further still while driving through that next additional range, etc. We'd be getting more energy out of the system than had been put into the system, which is a definition of perpetual motion.
There are any number of ways we can draw power off a running engine or electric motor to re-charge batteries, run heaters, etc; no one is arguing that can't be done or that it's a bad idea. What we are saying is that all of those approaches, including re-charging the batteries that drive the vehicle, will reduce a vehicle's range between re-charging or fill-ups.
I will leave @sneakypete to speak for himself.
I reject the idea that a towed platform can generate anywhere near the power of the vehicle towing. There has to be a diminished return... And normally that is large.
My point is that used within a reasonable parameter, the idea is sound. Certainly a drag that is but a pittance (a horse or two) is within the realm of 'doable' and acceptable (loss).
I do not mean to propose anything more.
-
Yeah I've tried to sort out how inertia would play into this. For the momentary period when the driver's foot is off the "gas" we are drawing minimally from the battery so wheel-generated power added back to the battery might be a net positive.
I suppose it depends on how we describe the cases for comparison. Capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle would certainly be better than not capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle, so for stop-start city driving I can see how one would argue the range is extended. But I would expect steady-speed highway driving to have a longer range than either of these stop-start cases, and that range to be impeded by continual recharging from wheel-generated incremental power.
That part I highlighted is 100% correct. What I described earlier does not apply to a long, no stop drive because there is no braking. It helps in city driving where there is a lot of stop and go.
-
I will leave @sneakypete to speak for himself.
I reject the idea that a towed platform can generate anywhere near the power of the vehicle towing. There has to be a diminished return... And normally that is large.
My point is that used within a reasonable parameter, the idea is sound. Certainly a drag that is but a pittance (a horse or two) is within the realm of 'doable' and acceptable (loss).
I do not mean to propose anything more.
That's right. The picture I saw posted upthread about a small trailer is not a generator, it's an auxiliary battery, like the "piggyback" batteries they used to have for cell phones.
-
That's right. The picture I saw posted upthread about a small trailer is not a generator, it's an auxiliary battery, like the "piggyback" batteries they used to have for cell phones.
Sure.
And I suppose that a trailer could tow a generator big enough to power the car - or come close - But that generator would need a fuel source onboard (and frequent replenishment), defeating the purpose of an electric car.
As to the trailer battery,
CERTAINLY, according to the size of the batt in the vid upthread, Multiple instances of that could be towed along on a trailer behind, resulting in a remarkably extended distance.
-
The idea that battery powered vehicles are going to replace those powered by internal combustion engines anytime in the foreseeable future is made up of
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.naturalnews.com%2Fgallery%2Farticles%2Funicorn-magical-farting-rainbow.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fclipart-library.com%2Fimg1%2F828458.png&f=1&nofb=1)
-
At one time the plan was to have a universal battery pack that was super easy to exchange. That way a "gas station" would have already charged batteries ready to go. So you pull in, exchange the battery, pay and go on your way. And then your old battery is recharged prepping it for another exchange at that station. No car owner owns a specific battery. All the batteries are part of pool across the country. Lots of issues... But that was the idea at one time...
-
Sure.
And I suppose that a trailer could tow a generator big enough to power the car - or come close - But that generator would need a fuel source onboard (and frequent replenishment), defeating the purpose of an electric car.
As to the trailer battery,
CERTAINLY, according to the size of the batt in the vid upthread, Multiple instances of that could be towed along on a trailer behind, resulting in a remarkably extended distance.
Of course there is an economic aspect as well. Those auxiliary batteries have got to be really expensive, as the discussion of my own battery situation somewhere upthread demonstrated. Thousands, perhaps 10's of thousands of Biden Dollars.
-
At one time the plan was to have a universal battery pack that was super easy to exchange. That way a "gas station" would have already charged batteries ready to go. So you pull in, exchange the battery, pay and go on your way. And then your old battery is recharged prepping it for another exchange at that station. No car owner owns a specific battery. All the batteries are part of pool across the country. Lots of issues... But that was the idea at one time...
It's a plan with merit, the only problem being the number of batteries in the pool would necessarily be much larger than the number of cars. Because they're made of rare earth minerals like Lithium the demand would likely be too high to be practical.
-
It's a plan with merit, the only problem being the number of batteries in the pool would necessarily be much larger than the number of cars. Because they're made of rare earth minerals like Lithium the demand would likely be too high to be practical.
I know you were thinking of the demand by the car owners.
I think a larger demand would be from the thieves.
-
Of course there is an economic aspect as well. Those auxiliary batteries have got to be really expensive, as the discussion of my own battery situation somewhere upthread demonstrated. Thousands, perhaps 10's of thousands of Biden Dollars.
Probably less than you think at the production level - And nothing says the form-factor need remain the same.
-
I know you were thinking of the demand by the car owners.
I think a larger demand would be from the thieves.
Just as it is with catalytic converters that have a lot of Platinum in them. And that's why they are so expensive to replace if you ruin them with leaded gasoline.
-
Probably less than you think at the production level - And nothing says the form-factor need remain the same.
True, but the cost of the materials to manufacture the batteries remains very high. We're still talking thousands of dollars at best, a cost that's difficult for the average motorist to carry.
-
Just as it is with catalytic converters that have a lot of Platinum in them. And that's why they are so expensive to replace if you ruin them with leaded gasoline.
Yeah. Probably best to cut them off. happy77
-
True, but the cost of the materials to manufacture the batteries remains very high. We're still talking thousands of dollars at best, a cost that's difficult for the average motorist to carry.
I would not think of the average car owner to buy them. I see that being in the realm of fleet managers - Go down to U-Haul and rent your 'brick on wheels' if you are planning a journey.
-
I will leave @sneakypete to speak for himself.
I reject the idea that a towed platform can generate anywhere near the power of the vehicle towing. There has to be a diminished return... And normally that is large.
My point is that used within a reasonable parameter, the idea is sound. Certainly a drag that is but a pittance (a horse or two) is within the realm of 'doable' and acceptable (loss).
I do not mean to propose anything more.
@roamer_1
I started this sidetrack discussion with the idea of a generator trailer that ran on fuel, for the very occasional use. No point for folks like you and I, but for those that lifestyle let them choose an all electric car as their only vehicle.
That person would be able to go rent the generator trailer for their once a year vacation trip allowing them to drive their short range vehicle a much longer range. It would take fuel. It would not be efficient. Cars would have to be designed differently to allow this continuous hook up and charger.
Reality is, more likely to just go rent a ICE car.
We got further sidetracked from there.
-
We got further sidetracked from there.
Which always happens when Topics go longer than 50-75 Replies. :shrug:
(https://www.plymouthorchards.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/blog-post-image-small-apple-pie.jpg)
-
Yeah. Probably best to cut them off. happy77
I can get away with that, now that I live in a County not under the burden of vehicle smog controls. :tongue2:
-
@roamer_1
I started this sidetrack discussion with the idea of a generator trailer that ran on fuel, for the very occasional use. No point for folks like you and I, but for those that lifestyle let them choose an all electric car as their only vehicle.
That person would be able to go rent the generator trailer for their once a year vacation trip allowing them to drive their short range vehicle a much longer range. It would take fuel. It would not be efficient. Cars would have to be designed differently to allow this continuous hook up and charger.
Reality is, more likely to just go rent a ICE car.
We got further sidetracked from there.
Yeah I know. Funny how it goes. But it is a fun topic. And a bit attractive to me in a smaller way - Not only because of the solar stuff I am knee deep in right now (electricity is not my main gig), but also because of a conversion I am doing to a Schwinn Meridian - A three wheel trike... I am putting a front hub electric motor on it and a 1500w battery. So I am catching the rudmentaries of this very thing right now, in a much smaller way.
I am digging this electric bike thing. I could be getting between a 10 and 15 mile range on something that needs no license, goes somewhere around 20 mph, and I will be in it under a grand.
I can see me making one for myself if this project goes OK. Just for popping into town. Of course, I will have to throw that basket on the back away, and cut down a garden trailer bed to mount back there, with custom fenders built onto that... but it is a neat thing. Fun to mess with.
-
I can get away with that, now that I live in a County not under the burden of vehicle smog controls. :tongue2:
#metoo :tongue2:
:silly: :cool:
-
Yeah I know. Funny how it goes. But it is a fun topic. And a bit attractive to me in a smaller way - Not only because of the solar stuff I am knee deep in right now (electricity is not my main gig), but also because of a conversion I am doing to a Schwinn Meridian - A three wheel trike... I am putting a front hub electric motor on it and a 1500w battery. So I am catching the rudmentaries of this very thing right now, in a much smaller way.
I am digging this electric bike thing. I could be getting between a 10 and 15 mile range on something that needs no license, goes somewhere around 20 mph, and I will be in it under a grand.
I can see me making one for myself if this project goes OK. Just for popping into town. Of course, I will have to throw that basket on the back away, and cut down a garden trailer bed to mount back there, with custom fenders built onto that... but it is a neat thing. Fun to mess with.
You must really be a country boy....no mention of chrome bumpers. rrthree
-
You must really be a country boy....no mention of chrome bumpers. rrthree
yeah. Satin black and 250lbs... The black is easier to touch up after boonie bashing, and doesn't show the blood as much when you paste a furry woodland creature all over the front of it.
My favorite color is camo. Then satin black. Then maybe chrome. happy77
-
yeah. Satin black and 250lbs... The black is easier to touch up after boonie bashing, and doesn't show the blood as much when you paste a furry woodland creature all over the front of it.
My favorite color is camo. Then satin black. Then maybe chrome. happy77
I'd paint it camo with big red splotches all over the front. As a bonus, it makes a good ride for driving through OBLM protests. happy77
-
I'd paint it camo with big red splotches all over the front. As a bonus, it makes a good ride for driving through OBLM protests. happy77
LOL! That's right. I dunno about the BLM thing. They showed up here for a few hours and went on home. Seems we ain't the polite hospitable sort. :shrug: :whistle:
-
@HoustonSam
Absolutely correct Sam, the engineer understands but struggles to communicate with others.
:beer: :beer:
-
Which always happens when Topics go longer than 50-75 Replies. :shrug:
(https://www.plymouthorchards.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/blog-post-image-small-apple-pie.jpg)
Needs a scoop of good vanilla ice cream!!
-
But @sneakypete, if you connect the wheels on that powerless hand cart to a generator and push the cart down the hill, the cart will roll more slowly to the bottom. Whatever energy you put into the hand cart by pushing it to the top of the hill is the only energy available to do anything while it's rolling back down the hill. If you divert some of that energy into running a generator then less of the energy will go into the handcart's forward motion. If the generator is large enough the cart won't roll at all, it will stay still on the slope of the hill.
The bottom line is that you can't create energy, you can only convert it from one form to another; every time you convert it some of it goes astray. If you want to get energy out of a moving vehicle by powering a generator with the vehicle's turning wheels, you can only get the energy to run the generator from the vehicle's engine, and the generator will create less energy than the engine puts into it. In your example case that engine is gravity.
A lot of folks have tried to beat this one for a long time, but it's like Supply and Demand in economics or gravity. It is what it is, and we can't beat it.
And many folks have a hard time grasping that FACT but it is true never-the-less.
That is the very reason that NO electric water heater, furnace, or stove can ever be as energy efficient as the gas version of the same appliance.
-
Needs a scoop of good vanilla ice cream!!
Or a generous slice of sharp cheddar cheese!
-
Cyber wrote:
"I took a test drive with an EV1 (back before they cancelled all the leases and crushed the cars), and they had a feature that used a generator from the wheels when you took your foot off the "gas" pedal as you approached a traffic signal. It slowed the car down without using the brakes, and pushed more charge into the battery. It was to help extend the range. I assume modern electrics have this feature."
The Prius has this feature. It can use the car's motors to "re-generate" power during braking and recharge the batteries.
"Regenerative" or "dynamic" braking has been a feature of railroad locomotives since the early years of the 20th century.
By switching the traction motors into generators, electric locomotives could "put power back into the wire" on downgrades through regeneration.
Diesel engines used dynamic braking, in which the motors also acted "as generators", but the generated power (no wire overhead) was "burned off" by way of resistance grids.
The dynamic could hold back the weight of a freight train on a downgrade, sometimes without even having to use the train air brakes at all.
With passenger trains, there's something called "blended brake" where dynamic and air is used together to slow the train rapidly. This is done automatically, the engineer doesn't have to control them separately.
-
@roamer_1
I started this sidetrack discussion with the idea of a generator trailer that ran on fuel, for the very occasional use. No point for folks like you and I, but for those that lifestyle let them choose an all electric car as their only vehicle.
That person would be able to go rent the generator trailer for their once a year vacation trip allowing them to drive their short range vehicle a much longer range. It would take fuel. It would not be efficient. Cars would have to be designed differently to allow this continuous hook up and charger.
Reality is, more likely to just go rent a ICE car.
We got further sidetracked from there.
Anytime you deal with an engineer...this is what happens...lolol...KIDDING! I dealt with a reservoir engineer earlier in the week this is about what happened...lol.
-
Anytime you deal with an engineer...this is what happens...lolol...KIDDING! I dealt with a reservoir engineer earlier in the week this is about what happened...lol.
In every significant project, there comes a time when you need to shoot the engineer and finish the work.
I tell my project team I am on the job to give everyone else someone to blame.
-
I tell my project team I am on the job to give everyone else someone to blame.
Would that we all had such leaders on our project teams.
I'm going to add that one to my Leader aphorism list.
-
In every significant project, there comes a time when you need to shoot the engineer and finish the work.
I tell my project team I am on the job to give everyone else someone to blame.
@thackney
I joined the discussion to suggest a doable plan for people with electric cars to drive long distances. I had no idea it was going to dissolve into a discussion about how many kilowatts could dance on the head of a pin,and how many that WERE dancing were break dancing,and how many were square dancing.
The idea in MY alleged mind was to develop a practical plan to GET THERE and GET BACK,and all I got was "it ain't gonna work because it ain't cutting edge."
Sometimes the point is to just get there and get back.
-
In every significant project, there comes a time when you need to shoot the engineer and finish the work.
I tell my project team I am on the job to give everyone else someone to blame.
LOL! :laugh:
-
Yeah I've tried to sort out how inertia would play into this. For the momentary period when the driver's foot is off the "gas" we are drawing minimally from the battery so wheel-generated power added back to the battery might be a net positive.
I suppose it depends on how we describe the cases for comparison. Capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle would certainly be better than not capturing energy from inertia during each stop-start cycle, so for stop-start city driving I can see how one would argue the range is extended. But I would expect steady-speed highway driving to have a longer range than either of these stop-start cases, and that range to be impeded by continual recharging from wheel-generated incremental power.
What you describe is why the brakes last longer on most vehicles that travel large distances on highways (like out here in the Dakotas) and you might not use your brakes at all for fifty miles (not much traffic, either). In town, though, braking is almost as frequent as acceleration, what with traffic, stoplights, and such, so it might make a difference there if the braking included using the momentum of the vehicle to generate electricity.
-
What you describe is why the brakes last longer on most vehicles that travel large distances on highways (like out here in the Dakotas) and you might not use your brakes at all for fifty miles (not much traffic, either). In town, though, braking is almost as frequent as acceleration, what with traffic, stoplights, and such, so it might make a difference there if the braking included using the momentum of the vehicle to generate electricity.
Electric regenerative braking, ie a generator tied to the wheel, is taking momentum, ie kinetic energy, and converting it into electric energy.
But it takes energy, it slows the vehicle down. You have to add more energy into the motor to keep at the same speed, like driving with the brakes on.
The trailer generator driven by the wheels turning on the electric car either slows the car down or adds more load to motor. It cannot be a gain to the system.
Many people miss the fact that as more energy is taken out of the generator, it gets harder to turn. It requires increasing torque to produce increasing kW.
-
Electric regenerative braking, ie a generator tied to the wheel, is taking momentum, ie kinetic energy, and converting it into electric energy.
It is the electric motor, functioning as a generator, not a separate generator.
But it takes energy, it slows the vehicle down. You have to add more energy into the motor to keep at the same speed, like driving with the brakes on.
It is only utilized for braking, not while keeping a steady speed. It is taking otherwise wasted kinetic energy, slowing the vehicle in the process, and using it to recharge the battery.
-
It is the electric motor, functioning as a generator, not a separate generator.
It is only utilized for braking, not while keeping a steady speed. It is taking otherwise wasted kinetic energy, slowing the vehicle in the process, and using it to recharge the battery.
Exactly, right. And regarding the comments about vehicles (like hybrids) with this technology getting better mileage in the city than highway, it's because wind resistance (drag) increases approximately with the square of velocity. Most of us drive much faster on the highway than in the city (i have a neighbor who is apparently an exception to this rule), so combined with the gains from regenerative braking, you might get better mileage in city driving.
Regenerative braking is one of the features I really like on electric cars. Most of the time I am able to do one pedal driving, pressing the accelerator pedal to speed up and letting off to slow down. My car knows to use the brakes when stopped.
-
It is the electric motor, functioning as a generator, not a separate generator.
It is only utilized for braking, not while keeping a steady speed. It is taking otherwise wasted kinetic energy, slowing the vehicle in the process, and using it to recharge the battery.
Yes sir, I agree completely. I was referring the previous conversation of trailer mounted and how this demonstrated the principle.
-
Yes sir, I agree completely. I was referring the previous conversation of trailer mounted and how this demonstrated the principle.
What confused me then is only halfway thru your comment did you mention "trailer". So I took that as a separate example.
-
What confused me then is only halfway thru your comment did you mention "trailer". So I took that as a separate example.
I probably wouldn't be an engineer if I could communicate effectively. Absolutely adore using drawings to communicate. I frequently leave out words that would have help describe...
I really try to reread and understand what I left out, but the voices in my head just fill in the blanks automatically...
-
I probably wouldn't be an engineer if I could communicate effectively. Absolutely adore using drawings to communicate. I frequently leave out words that would have help describe...
I really try to reread and understand what I left out, but the voices in my head just fill in the blanks automatically...
I always do what the voices in my head tell me to. 333cleo 333cleo rrthree
-
I always do what the voices in my head tell me to.
How do you hide that many bodies?
-
Yes, I can be picky. Years ago, at work, they changed the whole approval process on technical documents, to skip the entire test department, as we were, especially me, too picky on redlining documents.
-
How do you hide that many bodies?
Castles have catacombs.
-
Castles have catacombs.
Rednecks have backhoes.
-
Rednecks have backhoes.
I was going to mention that, thanks for taking the slack!
-
Farmers have hogs.
-
In the Bayou there be Gators.
-
I probably wouldn't be an engineer if I could communicate effectively. Absolutely adore using drawings to communicate. I frequently leave out words that would have help describe...
I really try to reread and understand what I left out, but the voices in my head just fill in the blanks automatically...
There are visual thinkers and something else entirely foreign to me thinkers...
-
I probably wouldn't be an engineer if I could communicate effectively. Absolutely adore using drawings to communicate. I frequently leave out words that would have help describe...
I really try to reread and understand what I left out, but the voices in my head just fill in the blanks automatically...
Code does that to me... I have to have the whole thing spun up in my head before I can write a lick. And if someone asked me to describe what I am doing, I would be incapable.
Same with building something. The blueprint is all spun up, and I can see it plain as day, but I couldn't tell you about it.
Every once in a while I find a kindred soul that looks at what I am doing and just gets it and begins to pitch in. Again, no communication necessary. Hard to find - extremely rare - And why I miss my old man. We were just always on the same page.
-
@thackney
I joined the discussion to suggest a doable plan for people with electric cars to drive long distances. I had no idea it was going to dissolve into a discussion about how many kilowatts could dance on the head of a pin,and how many that WERE dancing were break dancing,and how many were square dancing.
What type of square dancing? Traditional, contemporary Western, Irish, or Scottish?
@thackney
I joined the discussion to suggest a doable plan for people with electric cars to drive long distances. I had no idea it was going to dissolve into a discussion about how many kilowatts could dance on the heaThe idea in MY alleged mind was to develop a practical plan to GET THERE and GET BACK,and all I got was "it ain't gonna work because it ain't cutting edge."
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
-
What type of square dancing? Traditional, contemporary Western, Irish, or Scottish?
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
We must never forget the dynamic trio, "Gene, Joe, and Art." Gene is the Engineer, Joe is the Technician and Art is the end user.
-
What type of square dancing? Traditional, contemporary Western, Irish, or Scottish?
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
But...
It is also the engineer's job to determine if there's a violation of the laws of physics and to cut it off before too many resources are wasted on it. Something can look great until those pesky little nitty gritty details start emerging showing otherwise. It is real easy to ignore some "little" detail that no one has an answer for and keep going with the project with plans to address it later only to find out it can't be solved later with what was already done... Those are the things that should be done first. You have to resolve the unknowns first or at least know that they are solvable with certainty on the path you are taking.
-
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
Unless it breaks the laws of physics. And even then, if the client wants to pay for some R&D....
-
What type of square dancing? Traditional, contemporary Western, Irish, or Scottish?
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
@Hoodat
I'm not an engineer. I'm a dood wid a GED. I define "it works" when I get something to do what I need it to do,and to hell with everything else.
-
@Hoodat
I'm not an engineer. I'm a dood wid a GED.
@sneakypete
I also have a GED. Never graduated High School. If I had it to do over again, I never would have gotten the GED. It isn't needed to get into college.
-
@Hoodat
I'm not an engineer. I'm a dood wid a GED. I define "it works" when I get something to do what I need it to do,and to hell with everything else.
I'm not an engineer either. I was foolish enough though to stick with school through a 4 year BSET that took me 11 years start to finish. Well Navy took up 4 of those years.
and several years as a "Junior Engineer". And what was funny was that none of the jobs I held required all that education. All that mattered was "Can you do the work?"
And when I get sumpin working, I use it. I take no time prettying it up.
-
In the Bayou there be Gators.
In the Everglades there are boas, pythons, anacondas and gators.
(https://www.florida-keys-vacation.com/images/xPython-being-carried-out-of-everglades.jpg.pagespeed.ic.VQbWkYegGh.jpg)
-
An engineer's job should never involve the phrase 'it ain't gonna work'. An engineer's job is to find a way to make it work.
After 30 years on the interface of R&D with other functions I have to disagree. The most important thing a technical professional can do is to recognize which approaches can work and which cannot work so we stop wasting resources on the latter and put them on the former. When all ideas have to be nurtured and encouraged we get far fewer useful end products and far more science projects that go nowhere and usually don't even add up to good science.
At least that's been my experience.
-
In the Everglades there are boas, pythons, anacondas and gators.
(https://www.florida-keys-vacation.com/images/xPython-being-carried-out-of-everglades.jpg.pagespeed.ic.VQbWkYegGh.jpg)
@libertybele
You know what is NOT in the Everglades?
ME!
-
I too only have a GED and did not go to college at all. I was hired as a engineering tech at a large Sunnyvale microwave (and RF and digital) communications equipment manufacturer in the early 80's. I was promoted to junior design engineer and then senior design engineer after about 2 or 3 years. Can't really remember when anymore... I had a hard time getting through the door on the initial hiring as an engineering tech due to the HR department. But once I was finally hired I had no problems moving forward. After about 5 years of that I did consulting for several years and then started my own satellite communications company designing and selling satellite modems (and other related equipment) all over the world. I also hold patents on communications tech.
@DB
I once made a whiskey still and and a bong.
May not SEEM all that impressive,but I was VERY happy with the performance of both.
Not to mention several Harley choppers.
Or at least I think I was. Which when you think about it,is the same thing.
-
Castles have catacombs.
Let the donkeys pack 'em off--- @roamer_1 , rednecks have pigpens too... :whistle:
-
Let the donkeys pack 'em off--- @roamer_1 , rednecks have pigpens too... :whistle:
:yowsa:
-
I probably wouldn't be an engineer if I could communicate effectively. Absolutely adore using drawings to communicate. I frequently leave out words that would have help describe...
I really try to reread and understand what I left out, but the voices in my head just fill in the blanks automatically...
:beer:
That is why unless it is another engineer, I am almost worthless as a teacher.
-
But...
It is also the engineer's job to determine if there's a violation of the laws of physics and to cut it off before too many resources are wasted on it. Something can look great until those pesky little nitty gritty details start emerging showing otherwise. It is real easy to ignore some "little" detail that no one has an answer for and keep going with the project with plans to address it later only to find out it can't be solved later with what was already done... Those are the things that should be done first. You have to resolve the unknowns first or at least know that they are solvable with certainty on the path you are taking.
In the nuke world, we have an acronym for that - LOPA - Loss of Physics Accident......
-
In the Everglades there are boas, pythons, anacondas and gators.
(https://www.florida-keys-vacation.com/images/xPython-being-carried-out-of-everglades.jpg.pagespeed.ic.VQbWkYegGh.jpg)
Damn that's a lot boots.
-
Damn that's a lot boots.
Snake steaks!
-
In the nuke world, we have an acronym for that - LOPA - Loss of Physics Accident......
These sort of mistakes tend to be expensive...