Did consumers kill the electric car?

[Evan Tuer]

While we're talking about fantasy methods for long-range EV driving...
Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.   Charging
stations that can compete with a gas pump are also a bit problematic,
not to mention the expense of the batteries needed for such high-power
and high energy requirements.

So maybe charge-as-you-drive is the answer?  I'm not sure about an
inductive system, it would probably be lossy and very expensive, on a
par with mag-lev trains.

But how about conductive charging?  On multi-lane roads, reserve the
lane closest to the central barrier for EVs, and put a high-voltage
conductor along the top of the barrier.  To use it, a car just needs a
pick-up arm and a brush to return the current to a steel track in the
roadway.   Obviously there would be operational and safety problems to
overcome, but the infrastructure seems simpler and cheaper.  You are
just giving electric trains a second chance!

20KW per car say?  That's quite a lot of power, you might need 2MW per
mile capacity or more for peak times..  So you would need one wind
turbine per mile to go with it :-)


On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Mark Grasser <markgrasser@...> wrote:

> So if it were done inductively and the car inductor was on the bottom of the
> car and the feed inductor were in the pavement and you drove over on top of
> it, high frequency of course, could this work? How far away would you have
> to stand, etc?
>
> Mark Grasser
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...] On Behalf
> Of Peter Gabrielsson
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:43 PM
> To: evdl@...; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
>
> This reminds me of a scientist at the early part of the previous
> century who calculated what sort of rocket would be required to fly to
> the moon. He came to the conclusion that it would have to be as tall
> as 40 story building, weigh 3 million metric tons, and consist of ~80%
> fuel, produce mega Newtons of force, etc. Such a rocket was obviously
> unthinkable and his conclusion was that we'd never be able to get to
> the moon. His numbers were largely correct.
>
>
>> Let's assume that unlike the vast majority of the OEM EVs from last decade
>> that our hypothetical EV requires only 250 Wh/mile from the outlet (many
>> of the OEM EVs required 500 Wh/mile or more )
>
> Many of them required the A/C to run in order to cool the NiMH pack
> thereby using quite a bit of electricity while charging. 150-250
> Wh/mile from the pack was pretty typical consumption. Lets instead use
> a pessimistic 200Wh/mile for a sedan like the solectria sunrise.
>
>>
>> For a 300 mile range that works out to 75kWh, ignoring for the moment how
>> much it would cost for a LiPol battery pack that big, what does it take to
>> "Fast Charge" it?
>
> Why are you using consumption from the outlet to calculate the pack size?
>
> Using 200Wh/mile we get 60kWh pack. No pack can be fast charged to
> 100% SOC so the required charge amount is more like 50kWh.
>
>>
>> Let's say we want to do it in say 15 minutes and that the nominal pack
>> voltage is 370V.  To pump in 75kw in 15 minutes you have to push 300 kw.
>> Assuming normal charger efficiency
>> I come up with about 850 amps at 440V. And that's just to charge ONE car.
>> Can you imagine what the charger would look like?  Or how HUGE that charge
>> cables will be?
>
> Here's a 250kW charger, what you would need to charge 50kWh in 15 minutes.
> http://www.avinc.com/PowerProcessing_product_details.asp?Prodid=20
>
> This is a bidirectional unit with built in utility transformer, so
> it's a bit larger than a dedicated charger would have to be.
>
>
>> It took me a while to find a chart showing cables that big, it require 750
>> KCM cables.  Those are almost 1 1/2 inches around and weighs 4 lbs per
>> foot.  8 lbs per foot for a pair of them and almost 3 inches across.
>
> My less pessimistic numbers lead you to 550Amp cables. Of course, that
> is only for 15 minutes so a chart that presumes continuous rating, no
> cooling and cables in a conduit will give you the wrong number.
> Instead size the cables for acceptable temperature rise given
> realistic duty cycles and presence of cooling system and you actually
> get manageable cable sizes.
>
>
>
>>
>> The point is that there is no way in hell that anyone is going to build a
>> "fast charging" station for EVs with a 300 mile range.
>
> Hint:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/56927836@N00/2087692423/sizes/l/
>
> --
> www.electric-lemon.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[markgrasser]

What better place than on the center of the freeway for a wind turbine and
during off peak hours it could supply the grid.

Mark Grasser
 

-----Original Message-----
From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...] On Behalf
Of Evan Tuer
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:42 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?

While we're talking about fantasy methods for long-range EV driving...
Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.   Charging
stations that can compete with a gas pump are also a bit problematic,
not to mention the expense of the batteries needed for such high-power
and high energy requirements.

So maybe charge-as-you-drive is the answer?  I'm not sure about an
inductive system, it would probably be lossy and very expensive, on a
par with mag-lev trains.

But how about conductive charging?  On multi-lane roads, reserve the
lane closest to the central barrier for EVs, and put a high-voltage
conductor along the top of the barrier.  To use it, a car just needs a
pick-up arm and a brush to return the current to a steel track in the
roadway.   Obviously there would be operational and safety problems to
overcome, but the infrastructure seems simpler and cheaper.  You are
just giving electric trains a second chance!

20KW per car say?  That's quite a lot of power, you might need 2MW per
mile capacity or more for peak times..  So you would need one wind
turbine per mile to go with it :-)


On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Mark Grasser <markgrasser@...>
wrote:
> So if it were done inductively and the car inductor was on the bottom of
the
> car and the feed inductor were in the pavement and you drove over on top
of
> it, high frequency of course, could this work? How far away would you have
> to stand, etc?
>
> Mark Grasser
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...] On
Behalf

> Of Peter Gabrielsson
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:43 PM
> To: evdl@...; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
>
> This reminds me of a scientist at the early part of the previous
> century who calculated what sort of rocket would be required to fly to
> the moon. He came to the conclusion that it would have to be as tall
> as 40 story building, weigh 3 million metric tons, and consist of ~80%
> fuel, produce mega Newtons of force, etc. Such a rocket was obviously
> unthinkable and his conclusion was that we'd never be able to get to
> the moon. His numbers were largely correct.
>
>
>> Let's assume that unlike the vast majority of the OEM EVs from last

decade

>> that our hypothetical EV requires only 250 Wh/mile from the outlet (many
>> of the OEM EVs required 500 Wh/mile or more )
>
> Many of them required the A/C to run in order to cool the NiMH pack
> thereby using quite a bit of electricity while charging. 150-250
> Wh/mile from the pack was pretty typical consumption. Lets instead use
> a pessimistic 200Wh/mile for a sedan like the solectria sunrise.
>
>>
>> For a 300 mile range that works out to 75kWh, ignoring for the moment how
>> much it would cost for a LiPol battery pack that big, what does it take

to

>> "Fast Charge" it?
>
> Why are you using consumption from the outlet to calculate the pack size?
>
> Using 200Wh/mile we get 60kWh pack. No pack can be fast charged to
> 100% SOC so the required charge amount is more like 50kWh.
>
>>
>> Let's say we want to do it in say 15 minutes and that the nominal pack
>> voltage is 370V.  To pump in 75kw in 15 minutes you have to push 300 kw.
>> Assuming normal charger efficiency
>> I come up with about 850 amps at 440V. And that's just to charge ONE car.
>> Can you imagine what the charger would look like?  Or how HUGE that

charge

>> cables will be?
>
> Here's a 250kW charger, what you would need to charge 50kWh in 15 minutes.
> http://www.avinc.com/PowerProcessing_product_details.asp?Prodid=20
>
> This is a bidirectional unit with built in utility transformer, so
> it's a bit larger than a dedicated charger would have to be.
>
>
>> It took me a while to find a chart showing cables that big, it require

750

>> KCM cables.  Those are almost 1 1/2 inches around and weighs 4 lbs per
>> foot.  8 lbs per foot for a pair of them and almost 3 inches across.
>
> My less pessimistic numbers lead you to 550Amp cables. Of course, that
> is only for 15 minutes so a chart that presumes continuous rating, no
> cooling and cables in a conduit will give you the wrong number.
> Instead size the cables for acceptable temperature rise given
> realistic duty cycles and presence of cooling system and you actually
> get manageable cable sizes.
>
>
>
>>
>> The point is that there is no way in hell that anyone is going to build a
>> "fast charging" station for EVs with a 300 mile range.
>
> Hint:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/56927836@N00/2087692423/sizes/l/
>
> --
> www.electric-lemon.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Roger Stockton]

Peter VanDerWal wrote:

> Let's assume that unlike the vast majority of the OEM EVs
> from last decade that our hypothetical EV requires only 250
> Wh/mile from the outlet (many of the OEM EVs required 500
> Wh/mile or more )

Vast majority?

The NiMH EV1 consumed 127Wh/mi @ 45mph, 168Wh/mi @ 60mph, and 179Wh/mi per the SAE J1634 driving cycle.  It used 373Wh/mi from the outlet:

<http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/ev1_eva.pdf>

Stats for other OEM Evs can be found here:

<http://avt.inel.gov/fsev.shtml>

The 'Charge Efficiency Energy Costs' page in this PDF <http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/compare_graphs.pdf> allows a direct comparison of the Wh/mi from the outlet for all of the OEM Evs tested.  The values are in cents/mi assuming $0.10/kWh, so multiply the values by 100 and you have the Wh/mi from the outlet for each vehicle.

Notice that 3 of the 12 vehicles are over 500Wh/mi from the outlet (2 are pickups, the other is a Chrysler minivan; all 3 are NiMH); 4/12 are under 400Wh/mi from the outlet.

> For a 300 mile range that works out to 75kWh

Looking at the OEM cars (Force & EV1), it seems about 180Wh/mi is not at all an unreasonable average performance either for 60mph steady cruising or the J1634 driving cycle.  A 54kWh pack in such an hypothetical average EV would yield a 300mi max range.

Looking at the S10 and Ranger pickups it seems a typical OEM EV pickup is likely to consume about 320Wh/mi either at 60mph or over the J1634 cycle.  A 54kW pack in such a vehicle would yield only a 168mi range.  64kWh would yield a 200mi range.

50kWh consumed would yield about 150mi @ 320Wh/mi or 278mi @ 180Wh/mi, and at a charge efficiency of 64% (500Wh/mi AC vs 320Wh/mi at the battery) this would require about 78kWh from the outlet to replenish.

300kW could do this in about 15min, 200kW in about 23min, 150kW in about 30min.

The 180Wh/mi car would only consume 27kWh over 150mi, and so require about 42kWh from the outlet at our 64% charge efficiency.  Even at 150kW this is just a tad over 15min.

"Fast" is relative of course. ;^>

> The point is that there is no way in hell that anyone is
> going to build a "fast charging" station for EVs with a 300
> mile range.

Never say never ;^>  If/when there are significant numbers of EVs on the road, fast charging *will* appear if it is possible to make a buck satisfying the desire of people wishing to travel  longer distances in their EVs.  I think it is far more likely that EVs will stop every 150-200mi for 15-30min to fill up at existing service stations than for new filling stations to pop up every 50-100mi so that EVers can spend 15-30min refueling more frequently from a smaller 'pipe'.

300mi is probably a stretch.  My ICE motorbike doesn't get much over 150mi per tank, so while I do think a range similar to a tank of fuel in a comparable ICE would overcome a major physchological barrier to mass acceptance of EVs, the reality is that anything over 150mi is probably adequate to allow EVs to make long trips by recharging at existing ICE service stations.

Cheers,

Roger.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[zyewdall]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Evan Tuer <evan.tuer@...> wrote:

> Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.


Why?  Compared to doing an overhead catenary to recharge en-route, it seems
fairly easy, with an OEM EV at least.

I already have lots of stuff that takes swappable battery packs... just none
quite as large as an EV.

Z
_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Rick Beebe]

Zeke Yewdall wrote:
>> Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.
>
> Why?  Compared to doing an overhead catenary to recharge en-route, it seems
> fairly easy, with an OEM EV at least.
>
> I already have lots of stuff that takes swappable battery packs... just none
> quite as large as an EV.

Me too. And a whole collection of chargers because, of course, few of
the battery packs are interchangeable between tools, even from the same
manufacturer. That's the EV problem--getting everyone to agree on a
standard size battery pack that would work on every vehicle. Not that it
couldn't be done, of course--we aren't limited to GM tires or wheels on
a GM vehicle for example--but it won't be an easy sell.

--Rick

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Evan Tuer]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 9:33 PM, Zeke Yewdall <zyewdall@...> wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Evan Tuer <evan.tuer@...> wrote:
>
>> Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.
>
>
> Why?  Compared to doing an overhead catenary to recharge en-route, it seems
> fairly easy, with an OEM EV at least.
>

It's a great idea in some situations (localised use, one-owner fleets,
etc) but not for extended range driving, IMO.  How do you know where
people are wanting to go?
Just think of the logistics of it.  You'd need a huge number of packs,
and charging stations widely distributed around the place.  Even if
they are tacked on to existing gas stations it would be a huge
financial commitment, and the scheme would probably therefore be too
expensive for anyone to use it.

It would also mean everyone leasing their packs (which might be a good
idea but is never popular).

Anyway the conductive charging I described as not using an overhead
catenary due to the cost and difficulty involved with that :)
It's a thing that you could do after there are already a large number
of (let's say) 100 mile range cars in use as peoples' sole vehicle.
Wire up one freeway and let converted cars pay to use it.  Expand as
required.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Ralph-54]

Long range is likely to be capacitors.

EEStor we've all heard about. There is a company in Japan that has a hyper capacitor also; another in Taiwan and a 4th in Minnesota. Claimed energy densities are anywhere from 10X to 40X that of lead acid.

All of them promise a range, if we use the same number of devices as we have with batteries, of about 300-600 miles depending on the EV. Recharge times are 5-15 minutes if the right equipment were to be available. This is an engineering issue, nothing else- there is no technology breakthrough needed on the charging side, just the will.

Caps don't care if they are discharged all the way and you can't overcharge them. Charging losses are 2%/2% in/out rather than 30-35%. They also last longer- 25 to 50 years depending on how well sealed they are. Its pointless, from what I have seen, to compare hyper-caps to existing ultra-caps.

EEStor is supposed to have something in production this year. The others are all right behind so its literally a matter of months to see if they really are up to anything.

-Ralph





On Tue, 20 May 2008 07:34:50 -0600 (MDT)
"Peter VanDerWal" <evdl@...> wrote:

> > While we're talking about fantasy methods for long-range EV driving...
> > Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.   Charging
> > stations that can compete with a gas pump are also a bit problematic,
> > not to mention the expense of the batteries needed for such high-power
> > and high energy requirements.
> >
> I think trains are a more practical and realistic solution to long
> distance travel.
>
> It's probably easier and cheaper to switch back to track than it is to add
> conductive cables along the interstate.
>
> Use EVs for driving around inside towns and trains for long distance
> travel between towns.  Make sure the EVs are only 8 foot long so they'll
> fit on the trains sideways, just drive on one side of the flatbed in one
> town, and off the other side at your destination.
>
> Or, go with a whole new infrastructure and make the trains wider.  Have a
> walkway around the cars and dining & sleeper cars.  Relax on your way to
> your destination.
>
> I saw a commercial the other day about trains.  Even with todays
> technology, trains can move something like 400 short-ton miles per gallon
> of diesel.
> If I understand this correctly, then if our future EV weighs one ton, that
> works out to 400 miles per gallon.
> Even if we switch to electric trains, it's easier to provide power on the
> go to a train than it is a car.
>
> If you are going to put inductive coils in the road surface, then it's
> probably simpler to just use a shorted coil on the vehicle and allow the
> road to move the car, like a linear motor.
>
> > So maybe charge-as-you-drive is the answer?  I'm not sure about an
> > inductive system, it would probably be lossy and very expensive, on a
> > par with mag-lev trains.
> >
> > But how about conductive charging?  On multi-lane roads, reserve the
> > lane closest to the central barrier for EVs, and put a high-voltage
> > conductor along the top of the barrier.  To use it, a car just needs a
> > pick-up arm and a brush to return the current to a steel track in the
> > roadway.   Obviously there would be operational and safety problems to
> > overcome, but the infrastructure seems simpler and cheaper.  You are
> > just giving electric trains a second chance!
> >
> > 20KW per car say?  That's quite a lot of power, you might need 2MW per
> > mile capacity or more for peak times..  So you would need one wind
> > turbine per mile to go with it :-)
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Mark Grasser <markgrasser@...>
> > wrote:
> >> So if it were done inductively and the car inductor was on the bottom of
> >> the
> >> car and the feed inductor were in the pavement and you drove over on top
> >> of
> >> it, high frequency of course, could this work? How far away would you
> >> have
> >> to stand, etc?
> >>
> >> Mark Grasser
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...] On
> >> Behalf
> >> Of Peter Gabrielsson
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:43 PM
> >> To: evdl@...; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> >> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
> >>
> >> This reminds me of a scientist at the early part of the previous
> >> century who calculated what sort of rocket would be required to fly to
> >> the moon. He came to the conclusion that it would have to be as tall
> >> as 40 story building, weigh 3 million metric tons, and consist of ~80%
> >> fuel, produce mega Newtons of force, etc. Such a rocket was obviously
> >> unthinkable and his conclusion was that we'd never be able to get to
> >> the moon. His numbers were largely correct.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Let's assume that unlike the vast majority of the OEM EVs from last
> >>> decade
> >>> that our hypothetical EV requires only 250 Wh/mile from the outlet
> >>> (many
> >>> of the OEM EVs required 500 Wh/mile or more )
> >>
> >> Many of them required the A/C to run in order to cool the NiMH pack
> >> thereby using quite a bit of electricity while charging. 150-250
> >> Wh/mile from the pack was pretty typical consumption. Lets instead use
> >> a pessimistic 200Wh/mile for a sedan like the solectria sunrise.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> For a 300 mile range that works out to 75kWh, ignoring for the moment
> >>> how
> >>> much it would cost for a LiPol battery pack that big, what does it take
> >>> to
> >>> "Fast Charge" it?
> >>
> >> Why are you using consumption from the outlet to calculate the pack
> >> size?
> >>
> >> Using 200Wh/mile we get 60kWh pack. No pack can be fast charged to
> >> 100% SOC so the required charge amount is more like 50kWh.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Let's say we want to do it in say 15 minutes and that the nominal pack
> >>> voltage is 370V.  To pump in 75kw in 15 minutes you have to push 300
> >>> kw.
> >>> Assuming normal charger efficiency
> >>> I come up with about 850 amps at 440V. And that's just to charge ONE
> >>> car.
> >>> Can you imagine what the charger would look like?  Or how HUGE that
> >>> charge
> >>> cables will be?
> >>
> >> Here's a 250kW charger, what you would need to charge 50kWh in 15
> >> minutes.
> >> http://www.avinc.com/PowerProcessing_product_details.asp?Prodid=20
> >>
> >> This is a bidirectional unit with built in utility transformer, so
> >> it's a bit larger than a dedicated charger would have to be.
> >>
> >>
> >>> It took me a while to find a chart showing cables that big, it require
> >>> 750
> >>> KCM cables.  Those are almost 1 1/2 inches around and weighs 4 lbs per
> >>> foot.  8 lbs per foot for a pair of them and almost 3 inches across.
> >>
> >> My less pessimistic numbers lead you to 550Amp cables. Of course, that
> >> is only for 15 minutes so a chart that presumes continuous rating, no
> >> cooling and cables in a conduit will give you the wrong number.
> >> Instead size the cables for acceptable temperature rise given
> >> realistic duty cycles and presence of cooling system and you actually
> >> get manageable cable sizes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The point is that there is no way in hell that anyone is going to build
> >>> a
> >>> "fast charging" station for EVs with a 300 mile range.
> >>
> >> Hint:
> >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/56927836@N00/2087692423/sizes/l/
> >>
> >> --
> >> www.electric-lemon.com
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> For subscription options, see
> >> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> For subscription options, see
> >> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > For subscription options, see
> > http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Peter VanDerWal]

I'm not sure if I posted this to the list, or off list.
The initial argument (not mine) was that EVs can't be successful until
they satisfy the majority of consumers.

Hence the need for a 350 mile range and fast charge capability.

If you are going to impose those restrictions, then my contention is that
you must satisfy ALL of the expectations of Joe Sixpack.  I.e. he needs to
be able to do long distance trips at high speeds (like he does in an ICE)
so you have to assume at least 65-70 mph.
Jo also expects to refuel his vehicle in a similar time as he does now,
roughly 10 minutes or so.  15 minutes sounded to me like a reasonable
compromise.

Joe is NOT going to accept a 1 hour recharge times or even 30 minutes.

> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>
>> What we have to put INTO the vehicle is what counts when we
>> are figuring out how to get it in.
>
> Problem is, that it is difficult to tell from these numbers just how much
> we really do need to put into the vehicle.  The charging efficiencies are
> stated over a full charge, and the last 20% of the charge or so is going
> to be less efficient than the first 80% or so.  In a fast charge scenario,
> it is likely that charging will be in this "sweet spot" of relatively high
> efficiency.

I'll accept that AH in vs AH out is 100% in LiPol, but VOLTS in vs VOLTS
out is significantly different.  The faster you try to charge it
(regardless of the SOC) the larger the difference.

>> Even if we assume only 180 wh/mile from the pack at highway
>> speeds and assume the batteries can be fast charged at 85%
>> efficiency, that still works out to 212 wh/mile, and that
>> doesn't account for any efficiency loss between the charging
>> plug and the batteries.  It also assumes we can charge the
>> batteries that fast without active cooling, etc. etc. etc.
>> That is a LOT of assumptions that all have to be IDEAL (or
>> better) to beat my 250 wh/mile assumption.
>
> It isn't a matter of beating your assumptions, just a matter of making
> sure that the numbers and claims are reasonable.  Most OEM EVs did NOT use
> more than 500Wh/mi from the outlet, and some came very near to 300Wh/mi
> from the outlet.

If you read what I wrote, I never said "most" meeded more than 500wh/mile.
 I said "many" needed over 500 wh/mile.

I said that "most" need more than 250 wh/mile.  That apparently was
incorrect.  The PbA EV1 used about 250 wh/mile at 60 mph, at typical
highway speeds it used MORE than 250 wh/mile.  Every other OEM EV used far
more than the PbA EV1.  As I recall none of them used less than 300
wh/mile even at 60 mph, let alone the faster speeds typical on the
highway.

>
> While the AC Wh/mi is important for determining just how fast the 'fast'
> charge will be (or how big a pipe is required), the Wh/mi at the pack
> determines how much energy the EV consumes in travelling 350mi.  At
> 180Wh/mi, this requires 63kWh from the pack.  You did not state that a
> 75kWh pack is required, but one could easily be left with this impression
> from your wording.
>
> At 250Wh/mi from the outlet, one would need to return 87.5kWh to this pack
> every 350mi.  A 175kW charge point could achieve this in 30min.  350kW in
> 15min.

350kW, that doesn't really look like a lot of power.  As a data point,
that's enough to handle the average load over 100 houses simultaneously
(as long as they aren't running their Air Conditioning)
1/3 of a MegaWatt is a LOT of power.
Charge 10 cars simultaneously or power a small town.

>
>> As I've said before, I didn't come up with the 350 mile range
>> figure nor did I suggest fast charging of said vehicle.
>
> I'm not sure where the 350mi value crept in; my suggestion was of a range
> similar to the range on a tank of fuel, and the proposed "requirement" in
> relation to long road trips was that the EV needs sufficient range to be
> compatible with the existing distances between ICE service stations.
>> Obviously you can make it work if you change the basic
>> assumptions that I was saying won't work.
>> But doesn't that just prove me right?
>
> Nah; it just means that you made some assumptions that reduce the
> feasibility. ;^>

I don't think so.  I mean if it has to satisfy Joe Sixpack, I think I may
have understated the requirements.
>
> For instance, it was you that threw out the assumption of a 15min fast
> charge duration; an alternative approach is to look at what sort of
> infrastructure power level is reasonable and from this figure out the

Rmember we aren't talking your own personal infrastructure, it has to
handle ALL of the Joe Sixpacks out there, or EVs will never sell (so goes
the argument I'm trying to debunk)
Most places where you pull over to refuel along the highway have two or
three gas stations, each with multiple pumps, often with people waiting.

If it takes longer than 15 minutes to recharge, then you need even MORE
refueling points, or have people waiting to hook up and then waiting MORE
to recharge.

Look at how many folks get pissed off having to wait 5 minutes for a pump
to open up.  Imagine having to wait 20-30 minutes before you can even
START charging your vehicle for ANOTHER 30 minutes or so.

> The bottom line is that neither point of view can be proven right or wrong
> since it is all just opinion of what might or might not happen.  I expect
> that public stations offering faster recharges than are possible at home
> will pop up as enough OEM EVs hit the road to make it worth someone's
> while ($$$) to offer such a service.  At $0.10/kWh, the 87.5kWh recharge
> in the example above works out to $8.75 in actual 'fuel' cost for 350mi of
> driving when people are used to paying more than 3x that for a fill up;
> even if the retailer charged a "delivery/handling fee" of 100% of the
> electricity cost, that is *way* more money in their pocket than a
> comparable ICE fill up.

I don't expect "fast charging" long range EVs to happen in my lifetime,
even if I live for another 50 years.
If we accept that EVs have to have 350 miles range AND fast charging
capability before EVs become viable, then we will NEVER have viable EVs.

Use the proper tool for the proper job, EVs are NOT the right tool for
long distance traveling, at least not for the masses. There will always be
people willing to do impracticale things.

EVs ARE good for 90% of the day-to-day driving for the majority of the
masses.  THIS is the proper job for EVs and where we should concentrate
our efforts, not long range pipe dreams.


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Peter VanDerWal]

PbA batteries are roughly 75% efficient when doing a full charge (but not
an equalization charge)
350 / 0.75 = 466 wh input to the batteries, that makes your charger about
93% efficient.

FWIW, I'd bet the charger is less efficient than that, and it takes less
than 350 wh/mile from the pack.

> I recently installed a KWH meter in order to figure out what Sparky
> was really costing to drive. (There are a bunch of them on Ebay.) It
> is very close to .5 KWH per mile. With $.20/KWH electricity here in
> Bob's beloved Corrupticut, that comes out to $.10/mile for
> electricity. Based on my onboard meter, I had estimated 350 watt
> hours/mile. Are these numbers reasonable? Is my ferroresonant charger
> that inefficient?
>
>
> --
> http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1059
> http://stormselectric.blogspot.com/
> Storm
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Evan Tuer]

On 20 May 2008, at 14:34, "Peter VanDerWal" <evdl@...> wrote:

>> While we're talking about fantasy methods for long-range EV  
>> driving...
>> Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.    
>> Charging
>> stations that can compete with a gas pump are also a bit problematic,
>> not to mention the expense of the batteries needed for such high-
>> power
>> and high energy requirements.
>>
> I think trains are a more practical and realistic solution to long
> distance travel.

Well, that's the sensible answer, yes :)  I'd still like quick-ish  
charging as well though..

>
>
> It's probably easier and cheaper to switch back to track than it is  
> to add
> conductive cables along the interstate.
>
> Use EVs for driving around inside towns and trains for long distance
> travel between towns.  Make sure the EVs are only 8 foot long so  
> they'll
> fit on the trains sideways, just drive on one side of the flatbed in  
> one
> town, and off the other side at your destination.
>
> Or, go with a whole new infrastructure and make the trains wider.  
> Have a
> walkway around the cars and dining & sleeper cars.  Relax on your  
> way to
> your destination.
>
> I saw a commercial the other day about trains.  Even with todays
> technology, trains can move something like 400 short-ton miles per  
> gallon
> of diesel.
> If I understand this correctly, then if our future EV weighs one  
> ton, that
> works out to 400 miles per gallon.
> Even if we switch to electric trains, it's easier to provide power  
> on the
> go to a train than it is a car.
>
> If you are going to put inductive coils in the road surface, then it's
> probably simpler to just use a shorted coil on the vehicle and allow  
> the
> road to move the car, like a linear motor.
>
>> So maybe charge-as-you-drive is the answer?  I'm not sure about an
>> inductive system, it would probably be lossy and very expensive, on a
>> par with mag-lev trains.
>>
>> But how about conductive charging?  On multi-lane roads, reserve the
>> lane closest to the central barrier for EVs, and put a high-voltage
>> conductor along the top of the barrier.  To use it, a car just  
>> needs a
>> pick-up arm and a brush to return the current to a steel track in the
>> roadway.   Obviously there would be operational and safety problems  
>> to
>> overcome, but the infrastructure seems simpler and cheaper.  You are
>> just giving electric trains a second chance!
>>
>> 20KW per car say?  That's quite a lot of power, you might need 2MW  
>> per
>> mile capacity or more for peak times..  So you would need one wind
>> turbine per mile to go with it :-)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Mark Grasser <markgrasser@...
>> >
>> wrote:
>>> So if it were done inductively and the car inductor was on the  
>>> bottom of
>>> the
>>> car and the feed inductor were in the pavement and you drove over  
>>> on top
>>> of
>>> it, high frequency of course, could this work? How far away would  
>>> you
>>> have
>>> to stand, etc?
>>>
>>> Mark Grasser
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...]  
>>> On
>>> Behalf
>>> Of Peter Gabrielsson
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:43 PM
>>> To: evdl@...; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
>>>
>>> This reminds me of a scientist at the early part of the previous
>>> century who calculated what sort of rocket would be required to  
>>> fly to
>>> the moon. He came to the conclusion that it would have to be as tall
>>> as 40 story building, weigh 3 million metric tons, and consist of  
>>> ~80%
>>> fuel, produce mega Newtons of force, etc. Such a rocket was  
>>> obviously
>>> unthinkable and his conclusion was that we'd never be able to get to
>>> the moon. His numbers were largely correct.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Let's assume that unlike the vast majority of the OEM EVs from last
>>>> decade
>>>> that our hypothetical EV requires only 250 Wh/mile from the outlet
>>>> (many
>>>> of the OEM EVs required 500 Wh/mile or more )
>>>
>>> Many of them required the A/C to run in order to cool the NiMH pack
>>> thereby using quite a bit of electricity while charging. 150-250
>>> Wh/mile from the pack was pretty typical consumption. Lets instead  
>>> use
>>> a pessimistic 200Wh/mile for a sedan like the solectria sunrise.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> For a 300 mile range that works out to 75kWh, ignoring for the  
>>>> moment
>>>> how
>>>> much it would cost for a LiPol battery pack that big, what does  
>>>> it take
>>>> to
>>>> "Fast Charge" it?
>>>
>>> Why are you using consumption from the outlet to calculate the pack
>>> size?
>>>
>>> Using 200Wh/mile we get 60kWh pack. No pack can be fast charged to
>>> 100% SOC so the required charge amount is more like 50kWh.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let's say we want to do it in say 15 minutes and that the nominal  
>>>> pack
>>>> voltage is 370V.  To pump in 75kw in 15 minutes you have to push  
>>>> 300
>>>> kw.
>>>> Assuming normal charger efficiency
>>>> I come up with about 850 amps at 440V. And that's just to charge  
>>>> ONE
>>>> car.
>>>> Can you imagine what the charger would look like?  Or how HUGE that
>>>> charge
>>>> cables will be?
>>>
>>> Here's a 250kW charger, what you would need to charge 50kWh in 15
>>> minutes.
>>> http://www.avinc.com/PowerProcessing_product_details.asp?Prodid=20
>>>
>>> This is a bidirectional unit with built in utility transformer, so
>>> it's a bit larger than a dedicated charger would have to be.
>>>
>>>
>>>> It took me a while to find a chart showing cables that big, it  
>>>> require
>>>> 750
>>>> KCM cables.  Those are almost 1 1/2 inches around and weighs 4  
>>>> lbs per
>>>> foot.  8 lbs per foot for a pair of them and almost 3 inches  
>>>> across.
>>>
>>> My less pessimistic numbers lead you to 550Amp cables. Of course,  
>>> that
>>> is only for 15 minutes so a chart that presumes continuous rating,  
>>> no
>>> cooling and cables in a conduit will give you the wrong number.
>>> Instead size the cables for acceptable temperature rise given
>>> realistic duty cycles and presence of cooling system and you  
>>> actually
>>> get manageable cable sizes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The point is that there is no way in hell that anyone is going to  
>>>> build
>>>> a
>>>> "fast charging" station for EVs with a 300 mile range.
>>>
>>> Hint:
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/56927836@N00/2087692423/sizes/l/
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.electric-lemon.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> For subscription options, see
>>> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> For subscription options, see
>>> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> For subscription options, see
>> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Peter VanDerWal]

> Are we are forgetting duty cycle?
>
>  For example someone pushes 2000 amps thru much smaller wiring in the
> zombie because he doesn't have to do it for very long.
>  Perhaps 50% duty cycle would reduce the cable size.
>
> (at least it will become more flexible faster)
>

What are you refering to?

My cable size figures?
Recharging at a public charge station could be close to 100%.  I.e you run
at max amps until you're full, pull away and the next guy in line starts
charging at 100%   You have to assume that this will happen at least some
of the time.

The 30 seconds between cars won't have any significant effect on the
overall duty cycle.  Especially when you take NECs typical derating into
account.


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[gary k]

>>> Swappable battery packs are clearly a bit of a non-starter.
>>>      
>> Why?  Compared to doing an overhead catenary to recharge en-route, it seems
>> fairly easy, with an OEM EV at least.
>>
>> I already have lots of stuff that takes swappable battery packs... just none
>> quite as large as an EV.
>>    
>
> Me too. And a whole collection of chargers because, of course, few of
> the battery packs are interchangeable between tools, even from the same
> manufacturer. That's the EV problem--getting everyone to agree on a
> standard size battery pack that would work on every vehicle. Not that it
> couldn't be done, of course--we aren't limited to GM tires or wheels on
> a GM vehicle for example--but it won't be an easy sell.
>  

Of course it can be done, anything can be done!  I'm sure the first
iteration would be rough but it could evolve into a seamless system.  
What about battery modules that are built to an industry standard.  
Whoever wanted to participate and design to a standard could, the rest
would be left out.  The modules could plug together based on voltage
required, space available and range required.  This would be done by a
machine that tests them before installing them.  It would all take less
time than filling a car with gas.  There could be lithium modules and
lead acid modules with the same interfaces.  The modules would be smart
and log all data, as well as pass data along to the charger and data
center to keep track of WH used, duration of use, WH charged, voltage of
pack, etc., and charge the customer accordingly.  But I bet before all
that happens there will be some sort of fast charging.  Seems like both
should be pursued along with all other options - I don't think we'll
have a problem with too many EV options too quickly ;<}.

It all has to start somewhere, otherwise it'll be nowhere, and we need
it everywhere.

gary

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev