Electric cars

HydeRoad

I was looking at the new electric cars, on demonstration at the Ideal Homes exhibition recently. There are two alternative models, the Reva electriCity Car, and the Aixam Mega City Electric Car.

The Reva is marketed by an agent in Blackrock, Co. Dublin. It is a surprisingly comfortable vehicle to sit in, with excellent all round visibility through a very large glass area, although in styling it looks very compressed, and rather novelty-like. The advertised specs are as follows:
Range: 80km
Top Speed: 80km/hr
Charge time: 8 hours full or 2.5 hours for 60km.
€200 a year to charge (claimed figure)

The Aixam is marketed by an agent in Terenure, Co. Dublin. It is also comfortable inside, although gives the feeling of a larger car than the Reva, with less visibility and large blind spots particularly to the rear. The styling is much more conventional, and it would pass for a petrol engined car. The body panels are colour infused glassfibre, claimed to be scratch-proof. The advertised specs are as follows:
Range: 80km
Top speed: 64km/hr
Charge time: not given
€628 a year to charge, €310 nightsaver

The figures are based on publicity brochures. On questioning, the Reva seemed to score better all round, although there was little in it, and probably down to the individual sales reps. The Aixam is the more conventional looking.

1) Has anyone owned or driven these cars, and what comment would you make on them?

2) Are there any incentives forthcoming for the purchase of these cars, i.e. VRT, road tax, etc.?

I would suggest that the Green Party, in particular, should be initiating enormous incentives for the general acceptance of these types of vehicles, for two reasons, their efficiency and green footprint, and their small size, which would be far more city friendly, but probably the single thing that most puts people off. I would suggest no VRT at all.

Húrin

I agree, now that cars like this are available, the Government should restrict the sales of internal combusion engines (though the recession seems to be doing a good job of that!) and encourage these as an alternative.

However, there is no getting away from the fact that car ownership is at the upper limit in terms of Ireland's ecological and roads capacity. Further increases in car ownership should not be encouraged.

Chances of this happening though?

Del2005

I definately wouldn't want to crash one of them, they don't even have air bags. And since there is are very few places to charge them, not enough demand yet, I wouldn't like to drive to the shops and then find out it's out of leccy and no way to get any into it.

towel401

The Gee Whizz (REVA) gives electric cars a bad name, and should never have allowed into production.

There are real electric cars. Like the Lightning GT, even the Phoenix SUV or the saxo electrique if they fitted it with NiMH batteries

there will be more electric cars in the next few years but unfortunately some of them look a bit stupid. the i-MIEV is one of those stupid looking cars that makes a bad name for electric cars.

nothing wrong with encouraging electric car ownership even if that means more cars on the roads. any problems with congestion are because the roads were badly designed (small towns with narrow streets and no bypass) but the actual N roads and motorways outside dublin can handle way more traffic

robtri

The problem I see here is two fold.... and a big Concern at the end
1.looks and price....

Who in their right mind would buy an electric car, seriously... they one that are reasonably priced are so god damn ugly, you would want to be driving it with a paper bag over your head, the Reva is actually a double bagger ( an extra bag in case the first one slips off)

The good looking electric cars, like the lightening GT and the Telsa Roadster are riddiculously priced, £150K (sterling) plus....

2. Driveability..
elctric cars for all there worth, still have very limited ranges and long re-charge times, I mean they are great for City driving ina nd out of work ect... but what happens when you need to drive somewhere like Dublin to Cork and back again the next day? even if its only a couple of times a year you need to make a journey like this, you can't in your electric car....

and my main CONCERN

how green is an electric car?????????

ok lets look at the REVA here,
say you do 10,000km a year in it...
at 9.66KWh of energy for 70Km thats is 1380KW per year...
at eleccy grid co2 emmissions( I had to use the UK numbers didn't have irish) that equates to 0.741t of Co2 a year....

lets compare it to a good diesel engined car....
again for comparision 10,000Km a year..
a good diesel can average 25Km a litre ( i am using a VW polo for example also to note apeugeot 307 HDI production car holds record at approx 33km/l)
so for a 10,000km a year diesel car thats 400L of fuel which equates to
0.988T of C02 a year...

Don't get me wrong 247kg of Co2 is a nice saving a year ..... but the cars are not as green as people believe....


factors based on number from below
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/resource/conversion_factors/default.htm

and
http://www.comcar.co.uk/newcar/companycar/poolresults/co2litre.cfm?fueltype=diesel

siralfalot

robtri wrote: »

lets compare it to a good diesel engined car....
again for comparision 10,000Km a year..
a good diesel can average 25Km a litre ( i am using a VW polo for example also to note apeugeot 307 HDI production car holds record at approx 33km/l)
so for a 10,000km a year diesel car thats 400L of fuel which equates to
0.988T of C02 a year...

Don't get me wrong 247kg of Co2 is a nice saving a year ..... but the cars are not as green as people believe....


factors based on number from below
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/resource/conversion_factors/default.htm

and
http://www.comcar.co.uk/newcar/companycar/poolresults/co2litre.cfm?fueltype=diesel

add to that the "carbon footprint" (god i hate that term) of actually manufacturing and than disposing of the Batterys in one of those things, I'm sorry but electric cars have a long way to go before they can rival the conventional motor

homer911

robtri wrote: »

Who in their right mind would buy an electric car, seriously... they one that are reasonably priced are so god damn ugly, you would want to be driving it with a paper bag over your head, the Reva is actually a double bagger ( an extra bag in case the first one slips off)

Just looked up some photos - have to agree, these are ugly machines! I only do about 2k miles a year in my 10 year old car and would seriously consider an electric car, but not when they look this bad!

towel401

there will be better, cheaper electric cars with long lasting batteries in a few years. right now they suck but it's not going to stay that way

Carawaystick

Like better cars where "laminated Windscreen" isn't explicitly stated as a feature???

Cabaal

While it costs 99k (euro), the Tesla Motors electric car seems to be the only decent car I've seen that normal people would buy as it does decent milage,
244miles to the charge
0-60 in 4sec

robtri

Cabaal wrote: »

While it costs 99k (euro), the Tesla Motors electric car seems to be the only decent car I've seen that normal people would buy as it does decent milage,
244miles to the charge
0-60 in 4sec

The telsa is a stunning car... but it is pricey... how many people have that money to spend on a car??

244 miles to the charge.... is ok, but not when you consider that it takes 3.5 hours to charge under optimum conditions....

gerky

While the reva isn't exactly a pretty car, there are better and more conventional looking electric city cars coming to Ireland soon such as the think which has passed all safety standards and is 95% recyclable and the company takes back the batteries.

It has a top speed of 100km/hr (65mph) and a town range of 200km (126 miles) on a full charge.
And I think costs about €100 per 10,000 km to run.

robtri

gerky wrote: »

While the reva isn't exactly a pretty car, there are better and more conventional looking electric city cars coming to Ireland soon such as the think which has passed all safety standards and is 95% recyclable and the company takes back the batteries.

It has a top speed of 100km/hr (65mph) and a town range of 200km (126 miles) on a full charge.
And I think costs about €100 per 10,000 km to run.

do you know the name??? curious to look at it and its spec's, price etc and see how Green it is?

BendiBus

Ministers Ryan & Dempsey are due to make an announcement today re electric cars. There was mention in the Business Post a few weeks ago about Project Better Place setting up here.

Todays report: target to be 10% electric vehicles by 2020.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1126/transport.html

The SBP article

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=37246-qqqx=1.asp

gerky

robtri wrote: »

do you know the name??? curious to look at it and its spec's, price etc and see how Green it is?

Its actually called the think, here's the site I think ford have a big share in the company.
http://www.think.no/

It's not that unlike the reva but looks a little more like a micra or some of them smaller cars.

buynow

This is the future as I see it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid

Basically a plug in hybrid, You don't use any petrol on a normal commute and then you have an engine if you need it.

So you go from petrol to hybrid petrol to plug in hybrid to all electric, gradual process and probably don't notice the difference as a driver.

robtri

gerky wrote: »

Its actually called the think, here's the site I think ford have a big share in the company.
http://www.think.no/

It's not that unlike the reva but looks a little more like a micra or some of them smaller cars.

not in a million years..... why can't they make electric cars look nice, only had a quick look at website didn't see any numbers to play with..

robtri

buynow wrote: »

This is the future as I see it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid

Basically a plug in hybrid, You don't use any petrol on a normal commute and then you have an engine if you need it.

So you go from petrol to hybrid petrol to plug in hybrid to all electric, gradual process and probably don't notice the difference as a driver.

Its not a very green car, really at the end of the day, only reduces emmissions over a normal car if the power for the batteries is from nuclear or other renewable sources??

towel401

Getting power from a coal power station or even a large diesel generator is still more efficient than a diesel engine in a car. They should make a few decent turbine-electric cars with a removable gas turbine

gerky

robtri wrote: »

not in a million years..... why can't they make electric cars look nice, only had a quick look at website didn't see any numbers to play with..

Honestly I can't say that this


Looks any worse than this



Its only a small city car, and this is along the lines of what they are working on, the think Ox

towel401

the micra has to be the ugliest one of the lot. and it's usually old biddies that drive them

Tabnabs

The question is, who would want to buy a second hand electric car? Money down the drain...

towel401

Dyflin wrote: »

The question is, who would want to buy a second hand electric car? Money down the drain...

the same sort of person who used to buy a normal second hand car in years gone by?

derry

I have semi studied the REVA . As others mentioned serious issues for crashes.serous issues if you run out of juice away from a power source .
Feedback seems to suggest for electric cars devide buy 2 the advertized range so 40Kilometers for Reva is really doable . The 80 figure is a 80 kilometer down hill ride with a following wind if you can find that kind of down hill. I suspect it similar for all electric cars of these early generation types

My not too in depth study of the car shows it has 4 SVLA (sealed vented lead acid )AGM(Acid glass mat ) batteries of 12volts and 50 amp hour rating

Those type of batteries will typically require replacing from 250 deep cycle use such as 80% deep cycle . Thats with giving say a 60 kilometer range (thats being generous ).If you only did sall journey and topped up more frequently the cycle life can be extended to 500 cycles . However if 500 cycles were 30 Kilometers on a 40% discharge it very similar in costs
If you got 1000 cycles from discharges of only 20% and a range of 20 kilometers the costs remain similar (most SVLA AGM batteries return best cycle life ratio of less than ~50% discharge )

Similar graph exit for other battery types like NiMh or Lithui but they tend to be better able to be deeper cycle to ~70% with ~2000 cycles from NiMH or 500 from Lithuim or LiFe can return ~2000 cycles

When we factor in the subtansial extra cost of the other battery types they often exceed SVLA AGB battery costs in life cycle cost ratios

When you run the maths the replacement cost of the battery you often find the cost to run per mile is nearly as much as petrol.So all though the cost for recharging is low some few cents the replacement costs of the power source battery reduces this a lot

My quick gaze at the Aixam the other car was similar battery solutions with similar issues

As these issues for the electric cars with the SVLA AGM batteries become known the resale issues this will cause for the second hand market a deterence for the potensial secondhand buyers .This will also impact new buyers

The other more expensive and upmarket cars with the NiMh or lithuim polmer or LiFe solutions either in hybrids or PHEV (plug in Hybrid electric vehicles ) when you factor in the capital costs and running costs the case for a small diesel or petrol or E85 flex fuel car is far stronger for costs and CO2 emmisions

In London where the congestion charges and sometimes free parking and lots of charging points in parking places and congestion charging don't apply to Reva or Axaim or similar then the reason to get one is very strong
It costs something like E10 euros to go into London not counting parking costs so then it nearly a no brainer for a Londoner to buy one.

For us plebs stuck in FF land who ride big luxury gas gusslers and sold their souls to the oil companies the chances to get good green policies are low . All your likely to get is bad sticky plaster green policies which end up costing more than oil solutions and don't count on free parking for electric cars more like rip your face for a few cents of electric power from electric power outlets

Electric cars in time will displace petrol or diesel but not until Lithium or similar robust good solutions with quick recharging as in ~15 minutes or less at prices less than oil solutions arrive .


But for somebody who has a set life routine and can predict that they only go some ~40Kilometers a day and would have 8 hours to recharge the car the benifits would be great if there was a fuel price hike or supply issue

Derry

traco

Worth having a read of the thread on the motors forum below, similar vein. Figures quoted in this thread for CO2 for power are close, actual for Ireland - ESB 549g / kWh based on current station configuartion but they are improving that at present.

The figure that I want is the equivalent for petrol - well to wheel CO2 footprint as if you are going to factor in the CO2 footprint of producing the electricity then you should factor in the CO2 required to produce the petrol.

Motors thread - Ireland going for electric cars ?

robtri

traco wrote: »

Worth having a read of the thread on the motors forum below, similar vein. Figures quoted in this thread for CO2 for power are close, actual for Ireland - ESB 549g / kWh based on current station configuartion but they are improving that at present.

The figure that I want is the equivalent for petrol - well to wheel CO2 footprint as if you are going to factor in the CO2 footprint of producing the electricity then you should factor in the CO2 required to produce the petrol.

Motors thread - Ireland going for electric cars ?

if you are going for the car well to wheel for c02, you will have to do the same for the ESB, as they need to get their fuels from whereever they are sourced and mined and drilled etc likwise to the powerstations....

traco

robtri wrote: »

if you are going for the car well to wheel for c02, you will have to do the same for the ESB, as they need to get their fuels from whereever they are sourced and mined and drilled etc likwise to the powerstations....

True - but for a real comparision I want to factor in the CO2 figures from the refining of the oil as a minimum. Particulary as I keep hearing this comment being thrown about that "What about the CO2 in producing the electricity?" but ignore the fact that the petrol / diesel must also be produced by a manufacturing process.

Carlow52

traco wrote: »

True - but for a real comparision I want to factor in the CO2 figures from the refining of the oil as a minimum. Particulary as I keep hearing this comment being thrown about that "What about the CO2 in producing the electricity?" but ignore the fact that the petrol / diesel must also be produced by a manufacturing process.

Indeed, and if u read through this link u will see that making 'cleaner' pertol/diesel results on a higher CO2 footprint

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/2456430/The-Future-of-UK-Oil-Refining

derry

Ball park it takes 3 liters of oil to supply 7 liters of fuel to the fuel forecourts that supply the fuel for cars .There is energy used for extracting the oil and energy used to transport the oil before and after refinery and energy for refining the oil products.This is classed as 30% ratio

Many bio fuels are similar with 30% ratio from the machinery for ploughing ,planting ,harvesting , alongside the fertilizers and herbizides which are often all oil based.

Losses to get power to the electric battery would be typicaly 30% ratio.Typical 7 stage gas electric power will be 80% efficent peak .!0% loses to transmitt to car in the city or wherever is the plug point.(This is based on night time charging when power is available without to increase peak loads) Charging at peak load times would reduce the ratio to closer to 50%

However the car would return with supplied oil and bio fuels some max of 10% effeincy after that and often even as low as 5%

Electric would lose another ~10% from supplied power to charge batteries but could return from a max of 25% from that supplied power but typicaly ~15% or three times more efficeint or even in worst case could match oil or bio fuels

Derry

robtri

derry wrote: »

Ball park it takes 3 liters of oil to supply 7 liters of fuel to the fuel forecourts that supply the fuel for cars .There is energy used for extracting the oil and energy used to transport the oil before and after refinery and energy for refining the oil products.This is classed as 30% ratio

Many bio fuels are similar with 30% ratio from the machinery for ploughing ,planting ,harvesting , alongside the fertilizers and herbizides which are often all oil based.

Losses to get power to the electric battery would be typicaly 30% ratio.Typical 7 stage gas electric power will be 80% efficent peak .!0% loses to transmitt to car in the city or wherever is the plug point.(This is based on night time charging when power is available without to increase peak loads) Charging at peak load times would reduce the ratio to closer to 50%

However the car would return with supplied oil and bio fuels some max of 10% effeincy after that and often even as low as 5%

Electric would lose another ~10% from supplied power to charge batteries but could return from a max of 25% from that supplied power but typicaly ~15% or three times more efficeint or even in worst case could match oil or bio fuels

Derry

We all know that Electric cars are greener and more efficient than your normal petrol engined car, not too sure on your numbers here, do you have links to back these quotes up???

despite the benifits of the electric car at this moment in time, they still cannot compete with the petrol or diesel car, and till they can they won't sell in numbers.....

derry

robtri wrote: »

We all know that Electric cars are greener and more efficient than your normal petrol engined car, not too sure on your numbers here, do you have links to back these quotes up???

despite the benifits of the electric car at this moment in time, they still cannot compete with the petrol or diesel car, and till they can they won't sell in numbers.....

My numbers come from lots of reading on the subject and similar subjects like oil peak or refining or Bio fuels and alternatives

Basically oil is a moving goal post. A new oil field will spurt out oil with very little energy and the ratio can be maybe 1 barrel of oil energy input to retrieve 10 Barrels. A old oil field might require 5 barrels of oil energy input to extract 10 barrels of oil. So the extraction of oil is a average of the new oil fields and the old oil fields.As oil prices drop some older oil fields stop be extracted as uneconomic and when oil increases in value those fields are reopened to extract oil as it becomes more economic to do so. Refinery energy remains fairly contsant in comparison . Transport remains fairly constant .Oil companies will claim ~10% ratios so as to look better than alternitives or better still not include the oil energy input ratio so that oil starts at 100% and then say alternitives require huge energy inputs copared to oil . ~30% is a good basis and some sites will quote that but it depends on factors weather you include Russia or exclude Texas or north sea whatever. How long is a string.

Bio fuels are also a moving target .It depends on are you using sugar cane like Brazil where energy inputs are fairly low or include USA which uses corn where energy inputs are higher. I think my latest information came from New Week magazine a few months back or similar that figured that alternatives both Ethanol and Bio diesel were about ~30% energy input to get fuel to the fuel tanks in a car.


Apples versus oranges stuff.

In the sixties when oil fields were a lot newer the ratios for oil was lowwer and made Bio fuel alternatives less interesting.In today's world of older oil fields coupled with some new bio fuel solutions with similar ratios then bio fuels look poised to be a viable replacement to mining extracted oil products especialy for agricultural rich countries like ROI

Interesting paper from Switzerland .I compares the CO output unit for bio fuels compared to gasoline petrol taking into account factors like knocking down rain forest etc
Less CO2 output means less energy used too manufacture .Seems Rye and potatoes in EU are top of the table .I personaly supect it is bias report against Brazil as Brazil doesn't use rain forest land or knock any down to grow sugar cane .But both Brazil and EU are both advantageos to do bio fuels over oil extraction solutions

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/319/5859/43/DC1/1

Link to from "Time" magazine Brazil showing that sugar cane has no effect on rain forest

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1735644,00.html


Electric cars compared to todays badly made petrol or diesel or bio fuel cars seem to greener . However properly made petrol or diesel or bio fuel cars which return more than 100MPG would probably make electric battery solutions less green than burning fuel direct.



This link can explain the facts of direct fuel cars versus electric better

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMTCNOlozTA&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_760583

This link shows a interesting insight into the plans of UK oil refineries plans for the future some fourty years plus and some insights north sea oil production issues .
They sure are not planning to scale down production for reasons like lack of oil or lack of demand because electric cars are coming


http://www.docstoc.com/docs/2456430/The-Future-of-UK-Oil-Refining



I think I saw Aixam were in receivership in the UK

The batteries today can recharge in ~20 minutes for lipo and less than 15minutes for LiFe. The problem is costs are orbital often ~$30,000 plus just for the battery alone before you include the car .It like buying the 10 years fuel you would use 10 years in advance .

Battery costs do not look like they will be useful low price before ten years maybe longer


Ralf

robtri

derry wrote: »

My numbers come from lots of reading on the subject and similar subjects like oil peak or refining or Bio fuels and alternatives

Basically oil is a moving goal post. A new oil field will spurt out oil with very little energy and the ratio can be maybe 1 barrel of oil energy input to retrieve 10 Barrels. A old oil field might require 5 barrels of oil energy input to extract 10 barrels of oil. So the extraction of oil is a average of the new oil fields and the old oil fields.As oil prices drop some older oil fields stop be extracted as uneconomic and when oil increases in value those fields are reopened to extract oil as it becomes more economic to do so. Refinery energy remains fairly contsant in comparison . Transport remains fairly constant .Oil companies will claim ~10% ratios so as to look better than alternitives or better still not include the oil energy input ratio so that oil starts at 100% and then say alternitives require huge energy inputs copared to oil . ~30% is a good basis and some sites will quote that but it depends on factors weather you include Russia or exclude Texas or north sea whatever. How long is a string.

Bio fuels are also a moving target .It depends on are you using sugar cane like Brazil where energy inputs are fairly low or include USA which uses corn where energy inputs are higher. I think my latest information came from New Week magazine a few months back or similar that figured that alternatives both Ethanol and Bio diesel were about ~30% energy input to get fuel to the fuel tanks in a car.


Apples versus oranges stuff.


Ralf

So what your saying is that you have no data to back up these numbers?
thes numbers you are quoting are completely speculative and as the goal post shift so much, as per your words, we cannot take them as being correct.

Electric cars are the future of motoring, in some shape or form, but till we have a practical electric car that can do everything as good if not better than the internal combustion car, it won't happen..... no matter what you say or numbers you produce, that is the bottom line....

derry

We are both agreed that in your second statement that

robtri wrote: »

Electric cars are the future of motoring, in some shape or form, but till we have a practical electric car that can do everything as good if not better than the internal combustion car, it won't happen..... no matter what you say or numbers you produce, that is the bottom line....

That leads to I can or you can come up all sorts of data depending which side of the fence you want to argue the case

That is why I present data without a myriad of sources as which source you want to believe and as it not relevant to the issue to pin down the numbers

What will happen is when motorists start to prefer to buy electric because of some advantage that is the only number that counts

Electric car sales in Ireland are so low as to barely exist.The rest of the world is similar


Derry

robtri

derry wrote: »

We are both agreed that in your second statement that





That leads to I can or you can come up all sorts of data depending which side of the fence you want to argue the case

That is why I present data without a myriad of sources as which source you want to believe and as it not relevant to the issue to pin down the numbers

What will happen is when motorists start to prefer to buy electric because of some advantage that is the only number that counts

Electric car sales in Ireland are so low as to barely exist.The rest of the world is similar


Derry

Actually you don't present the data fairly, you keep pushing bio fuels...seriously whats the deal... are you involved with bio fuels??

derry

robtri wrote: »

Actually you don't present the data fairly, you keep pushing bio fuels...seriously whats the deal... are you involved with bio fuels??

If switching from normal petrol in my tank for my non flex feul Suziki swift 98 model car to using ethanol E85 and usung that fuel until november 2008 makes me soe investor in bio fuels then thats the extent of my involvement.
I am sorta biased as real world that what worked for me saved me lots of money from being ripped of with fuel at 1.30 a liter.

Now The facts are fuel is very dense power source
!kg of fuel will drive a 35KW engine for 5 minutes . One Kg of Lithuim polymer will drive the same engine for 17 seconds we can say that lithuim is ~7% the power density as Petrol.
Now the car with the 35Kw engine will be wasing ost of the enegy and maybe we get 15% of the energy back as work done .The eletric car will will be 50% effient with power.So we dont need to runa 35kw motor to equal a that power we need a motor that is about 15% of 35 KW. Even so the pwtrol will be ahead on fuel density rage per KG and way ahead on cost per mile and costs to buy.Lead acid battery like AGM VLSA types are 1% the power density of Petrol so even though much cheaper are very heavy.New methods of charging and using lead lined carbon plates might help to speed up recharging and reduce weight but that future stuff.As ethanol and BIO diesel are similar in power density and with sometimes no mods to car engines or often minor mods to car engines the solution is there in our face rweady to go and could employ a lot of Irish farmers who are on the scratch

So if all of a sudden I am in with the farers or the bio companies or green brigade well nothing I can do about that as Al I want is cheaper fuel at more stable prices that isnt sending money out from ROI and isnt so detremental to the CO2 emmisions and enviorement. Brazil does it sucefully so if the so called backward countries like there who stick in our face how stupid we are to be beholden to the oil companies , then we should look to see if we can copy what really works has worked for 30 plus years and wont require us to import a load of batteries to run our cars


Derry

towel401

I think electric motors are more than 50% efficient.

also transmission losses in the national grid are slightly less than 10% in most cases

derry

towel401 wrote: »

I think electric motors are more than 50% efficient.

also transmission losses in the national grid are slightly less than 10% in most cases

I was refering to the global return of the power in versus power out
100% power in electric motor typicaly 85%

The losses such as drag from air acceleration brakes fiction friction generaly and then power losses from battery supply to electric engine from heat makes 50% global returns more likely or simply put the 1/2 the power input is wasted .

Transmission losses from power station to the plug outlet at a house house can vary a lot so 10% is a average

This means the global return from the car is really 50% of 90% of the power that is supplied to the house and the ~90% (best case )that get into the battery from losses charging battery making ~30% global return from the car after the whole story is inputed.20% is often closer to real world results.so if for example we after electric power staion losses and transmission losses and cheical losses to get battery eant the car started with 40% of the original power then 50% of that would mean 20% global returns
Still better than a 10% global returns from a internal combustion but any flaws in the electric system such as cheapo low efficient parts and the losses mount quickly

Hope that clears the story a bit but its not my fault that there are these huge losses in all energy systems

Derry

BendiBus

Here's a fairly reasonable looking plug-in hybrid. It's a car from a Chinese battery company. Due to go on sale today (Monday 15th) according to Wikipedia

100kms per charge
50% charge in 10 minutes
10% owned by Warren Buffet
Price unclear but Wiki links to reports ranging from $15-25K

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_F3DM



A report and a video from BBC & RTE respectively

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7779261.stm

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1210/6news_av.html?2461425,null,230

thehamo

saw a new honda on top gear tonight. Works on hydrogen, electric engine, aparantly as good as any petrol family saloon. Dont have to plug it in you just fill up on hydrogen. Only on sale in the states though but looks very promising.

BendiBus

thehamo wrote: »

you just fill up on hydrogen.

Where?

robtri

derry wrote: »

If switching from normal petrol in my tank for my non flex feul Suziki swift 98 model car to using ethanol E85 and usung that fuel until november 2008 makes me soe investor in bio fuels then thats the extent of my involvement.
I am sorta biased as real world that what worked for me saved me lots of money from being ripped of with fuel at 1.30 a liter.

Blah blah blah..

So if all of a sudden I am in with the farers or the bio companies or green brigade well nothing I can do about that as Al I want is cheaper fuel at more stable prices that isnt sending money out from ROI and isnt so detremental to the CO2 emmisions and enviorement. Brazil does it sucefully so if the so called backward countries like there who stick in our face how stupid we are to be beholden to the oil companies , then we should look to see if we can copy what really works has worked for 30 plus years and wont require us to import a load of batteries to run our cars


Derry

I was just asking a simple question, as your promotion of Bio fuels is excessive, and your verbal commentry on the oil companies is also noted...
you pull these numbers out of the air, no back up no links.....

siralfalot

BendiBus wrote: »

Where?

why at the filling station of course :rolleyes:

its not like when the first petrol cars came out there was a network of petrol stations just waiting for them is it? No, they were built up over time.

existing petrol stations wil have to adapt to it, just like anyone else will.

robtri

BendiBus wrote: »

Here's a fairly reasonable looking plug-in hybrid. It's a car from a Chinese battery company. Due to go on sale today (Monday 15th) according to Wikipedia

100kms per charge
50% charge in 10 minutes
10% owned by Warren Buffet
Price unclear but Wiki links to reports ranging from $15-25K

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_F3DM



A report and a video from BBC & RTE respectively

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7779261.stm

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1210/6news_av.html?2461425,null,230

Not a bad looking car, on the right track.... but did you read the BBC report
"BYD's vast new factory did not exist 15 months ago, and they had to level several hills and fill in several lakes to create the site. "

so they built a car that is slighty more greener than a normal car ( i would love to see the specs on this car to figure how much greener), they destroyed, hills and lakes?????? maybe its just me but does this not seem a little bit WRONG!!!!!!

fishfoodie

siralfalot wrote: »

why at the filling station of course :rolleyes:

its not like when the first petrol cars came out there was a network of petrol stations just waiting for them is it? No, they were built up over time.

existing petrol stations wil have to adapt to it, just like anyone else will.

Ever seen a Hydrogen explosion ?

Hydrogen storage isn't something I'd be comfortable leaving in the hands of any existing Petrol station operator.

loyatemu

fishfoodie wrote: »

Ever seen a Hydrogen explosion ?

Hydrogen storage isn't something I'd be comfortable leaving in the hands of any existing Petrol station operator.

Petrol is a tad volatile also. It seems some stations in CA are already stocking hydrogen.

The Top Gear report made it look like a serious option. They also road-tested the Tesla earlier in the show (it goes great in a straight line, but corners like a dog due to battery weight, and range and recharge times are very poor).

One valid point they made was that people are used to the idea that you can refuel a car in several minutes. Having to recharge for X no. of hours would require a serious change of mindset, and would be a major step backwards in terms of usability.

There's also the question of where the electricity to recharge the batteries is coming from (coal and gas mostly in this country). That said, I don't know whats involved in extracting hydrogen - I've heard that current methods are quite heavily polluting...

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_clarity

BendiBus

loyatemu wrote: »

There's also the question of where the electricity to recharge the batteries is coming from (coal and gas mostly in this country). That said, I don't know whats involved in extracting hydrogen - I've heard that current methods are quite heavily polluting...

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_clarity

The most advanced electric car project, Project Better Place, envisages swapping batteries at service stations rather than waiting to recharge.

Plug-in hybrids can be used to supply the grid as well as charge from it. This allows for better balancing of demad with supply, thereby allowing an increase in the amount of "intermittent" renewable energy on the grid.

Plug-in electric vehicles and green electricity are complementary.

fishfoodie

loyatemu wrote: »

Petrol is a tad volatile also. It seems some stations in CA are already stocking hydrogen.

The volatility of Hydrogen & Petrol are incomparable. You can drop a lit match on a pool of petrol & the petrol will extinguish the match. If you open the valve on a gas cylinder of hydrogen you instantly get a flame which can only be extinguished by cutting off the fuel supply.

Hydrogen is also the the smallest molecule, so in other words it will ALWAYS find a way to leak !

oscarBravo

fishfoodie wrote: »

You can drop a lit match on a pool of petrol & the petrol will extinguish the match.

I'm willing to bet you've never actually tried that.

If you open the valve on a gas cylinder of hydrogen you instantly get a flame which can only be extinguished by cutting off the fuel supply.

I'm pretty confident you haven't tried that either.

Back to your earlier question: have you ever seen a hydrogen explosion?

fishfoodie

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm willing to bet you've never actually tried that. I'm pretty confident you haven't tried that either.

Back to your earlier question: have you ever seen a hydrogen explosion?

You'd lose on first two counts

As to the third I've been fortunate enough not to see a Hydrogen explosion, but I've seen both controlled & uncontrolled Hydrogen fires. I've seen the aftermath of a couple of 'small' hydrogen explosions ( 1-2 m3 of H2 at 1Atd Atmosphere).

The best demonstration I've seen of what hydrogen can do was a 2 tonne piece of equipment shifted by about 30cm from as much Hydrogen (Actually Silane SiH4) as would fit in 10m of 5mm diameter pipe.

[edit] for $hite spelling as usual

robtri

Did anybody see the Tesla car on top gear at the weekend, just watched it last night, Sorry can't link to it as work blocks all videos....
anyway....
the Tesla is, as I have said before, a fantastic looking and and a very advanced piece of engineering.... the top gear testing on the track had a lot of good points and a couple of bad ones....
good points: looks great, it is fast(very),

Bad points: the claimed 200mile limit was reduced to 55 miles on the lap, charging from a standard 13amp socket takes 16 hours( they did make the pointof where that electricity was generated) and charging from a small windturbine that had set up takes 600 hours.....
handling wasn't great( personally won't be worried by that one) and reliablity wa an issue with the two cars they had( also wouldn't be overly worried, as that will improve)

it is very promising for electric cars, but really shows hat there is a long long way to go still yet before they are practical... one point Clarkson made really does hit home, driving from London to Scotland will take 3 days in a Tesla.....

Now Jame's hydrogen fuel cell car was fantastic, absolutely great and I believe something like that might be the future alright... right on the money, looked like a normal car, drove like a normal car, filled up in same time as a normal car, the only problem for a car point I see is the 200 mile range( but that will probably, get a lot better as this develops)

towel401

robtri wrote: »

Did anybody see the Tesla car on top gear at the weekend, just watched it last night, Sorry can't link to it as work blocks all videos....
anyway....
the Tesla is, as I have said before, a fantastic looking and and a very advanced piece of engineering.... the top gear testing on the track had a lot of good points and a couple of bad ones....
good points: looks great, it is fast(very),

Bad points: the claimed 200mile limit was reduced to 55 miles on the lap, charging from a standard 13amp socket takes 16 hours( they did make the pointof where that electricity was generated) and charging from a small windturbine that had set up takes 600 hours.....
handling wasn't great( personally won't be worried by that one) and reliablity wa an issue with the two cars they had( also wouldn't be overly worried, as that will improve)

it is very promising for electric cars, but really shows hat there is a long long way to go still yet before they are practical... one point Clarkson made really does hit home, driving from London to Scotland will take 3 days in a Tesla.....

Now Jame's hydrogen fuel cell car was fantastic, absolutely great and I believe something like that might be the future alright... right on the money, looked like a normal car, drove like a normal car, filled up in same time as a normal car, the only problem for a car point I see is the 200 mile range( but that will probably, get a lot better as this develops)

but he forgot to mention that the clarity is actually a piece of crap