Toyota says it will fight U.S. House electric vehicle tax plan

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: scrounger

With respect but you're full of BS. This ATS, is what I wrote about having no clue but a strong opinion.
If the battery is low on charge it charges very fast.

After only 10min, 43% charge.
Indeed 40min for almost full charge.
Will you apologize for calling me a bull#ter?

Here is "evidence" LMFAO

I gave you an exact facts on recharge rates done by an internet search..

not an "opinion"

also listed by types of rechargers to INCLUDE the new tesla system

do you need the exact link or are you claiming what i posted is wrong?

btw i honestly dont know where you got this but its IMPOSSIBLE to go from empty to full charge with current tech in 40 min

if it was be all over the news.

nice try but still bs

scrounger

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

btw here is were my source was from and EXACT LINK

www.ucsusa.org...

BTW not a "oil company site" so save that argument

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger
What is your problem?

I wrote 7mins give me about 100km range and that's true, even backed by an independent party that measured it. The chart is what I posted.

You wrote I am a liar. I brought evidence I am not, the sheet covers my real life experience.

Please STFU.

originally posted by: ntech
Actually I would think a rechargeable car fleet is a stupid idea based on the current technology. It's using mostly dirty coal based electricity to charge lithium batteries which is a rare metal that's hard to get to. And hard to recycle once used up. Not to mention the upgrades needed to the grid to charge all those batteries.

We would be much better off looking for alternatives to lithium batteries and and turning it into the Betamax of the 2020s as soon as possible. I posted this thread 2 years ago as a possible alternative fuel cell.

Single use fuel cells that are easily recyclable. No need to invest in infrastructure except for some storage sheds out back of current gas stations.

I actually looked at this link and found the tech more promising (in the short term) than the current EV systems

in essence it turns your vehicle into a kids "toy" battery device..

i can see great promise in say semis where you just remove where the old gas tanks are and put in a removable pack

now to be fair i always question the "in lab " millage vs real world..
hell gas MPG have always been (bluntly) full of #.

but in the short time this LOOKS like could be made economically viable faster than current EV cars

scrounger

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: scrounger
What is your problem?

I wrote 7mins give me about 100km range and that's true, even backed by an independent party that measured it. The chart is what I posted.

You wrote I am a liar. I brought evidence I am not, the sheet covers my real life experience.

Please STFU.

sign AGAIN what source?

you posted a pic of a chart

bad form

scrounger


btw my "problem" is ATS deny ignorance... your claim does not hold up

a reply to: scrounger
insideevs.com...
An now you question the source AND my real life experience?

I'm done here, bad form? Lol have you thought about using some punctuation marks?

What's your problem?

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: scrounger
insideevs.com...
An now you question the source AND my real life experience?

I'm done here, bad form? Lol have you thought about using some punctuation marks?

What's your problem?

yawn

as usual when debating someone on EV's when the FACTS dont add up to what they claim they throw a "hissy fit", attack, cherry pic sources (btw your own source states "according to Porsche, charging from 5 to 80% should take", key word SHOULD), play the "grammar police" card, and then rant again.

i go by HARD NUMBERS and the source I used (clearly didnt read) took all charging ways into account.

now to be fair your source was quoting stats from a NEW but yet not production nor real world results charger system UNIQUE to the porche...
but not hard statistics by use, just lab results..

as for your "personal experience"... i give it no weight either good or bad.

because it cannot be verified.. thus hard numbers....

either way EV does not live up to (at this time) the hype of environmental, range, or better than gas..

unless specific limited uses..

scrounger

Lol, later when I go buy lunch, I pause a second before I get into my 7min/100km-lie EV to laugh at you.

Excuse me now I have to do some work. ICE is not dead yet and customers want results.

Toodeloo

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
Lol, later when I go buy lunch, I pause a second before I get into my 7min/100km-lie EV to laugh at you.

Excuse me now I have to do some work. ICE is not dead yet and customers want results.

Toodeloo

we see the last play left to people who cant debate with facts and all their rants fail

take their ball and go home

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

The facts you don't like because they do not fit your narrative. Case is clear, you tried to dispute what I added to the thread by comparing a 800V battery to your smartphone and using big words.

When I supported my anecdotal claims roughly from experience with charts, you attack the source.

Don't try to spin this on me. I opt out of this because it's a waste of time to go back and forth about it further more! Also maybe try writing coherent sentences and use punctuation, be a bit respectful and then you have an actual "debate".

What you call "debate" is just childish fighting. You can't even be bothered to use correct grammar or punctuation, a paragraph isn't something to fill out with crayons either.

a reply to: scrounger

GM and Ford have gotten more direct subsidies than Tesla. Your point on them being around longer stands, but most of these subsidies were in the last 20 years.

Iraq cost trillions.

The point is, the legacy car market in the US has been directly assisted by the federal government. I'm not arguing whether or not it was in the countries best interest.... But if EVs give consumers a tax credit for buying them, that's hardly something new.

At least this way it benefits domestic companies... Which, by the way, GM will fit under with their new EV line.

I'm not a die hard EV person. I drive a diesel right now. I understand that the technology has a way to go. I'm an agnostic consumer and investor. If something makes more sense, I'll either buy it to consume or invest. The tech is going to be sensible for a lot of people some day soon (already sensible for short commuters now).

Some people are just virulently against it because it's something new, or because political rivals support it. But this country has often lead the world in innovation. I don't see why we should stop now because of stubbornness or spite.

originally posted by: scrounger
btw here is were my source was from and EXACT LINK

www.ucsusa.org...

BTW not a "oil company site" so save that argument

The link is from three years ago, the technology has improved significantly since then. Rapid chargers can bring a vehicle to around 80% in 20 minutes.

a reply to: scrounger

either way EV does not live up to (at this time) the hype of environmental, range, or better than gas..

Keep in mind one of the big reasons some governments are pushing for them is smog problems. I get the lithium argument, but that will likely get mitigated to some extent as the technology progresses.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
On the 270kW charger, if the transformer gives the OK for full power, it's about 45 min and 100% charged on a 93kW battery bith around 84kW usable energy and that's just the beginning. When 800V battery tech is common and more refined, it will be even faster. I get +500km range if I drive gentle.

400km is around average but when I kick it then it's ~200km per charge. And kicking means shredding tires, repeated launches 0-120mph, race track or lead foot on the autobahn. Unlike the Tesla, it can do it all day

I'm all for EV's in selected environments, but I'm totally against the notion of completely eliminating ICE's.

As I noted previously, the challenge with EV's is not the EV's themselves, but the charging infrastructure. Here's why...

No matter how you slice it, a watt is a watt. Without getting real technical Ohm's law dictates that volts x amps = watts (it really equals VA which then gets a power factor applied to it, but this is too technical for this discussion). You can distribute power (watts / energy) in a multitude of ways, but virtually all of those ways involve using wire. Power distribution (with few exceptions) is done using alternating current, AC. (DC power distribution is inefficient) (Note: the point here is not to debate DC vs AC power distribution, as there is some very high voltage DC power distribution, but it is pretty rare).

In a power distribution system, wire/cable, represents a significant portion of the cost of the system. Large amperage takes large wire. Large gauge wire is far more expensive than smaller gauge wire. To combat this, power distribution systems distribute power at very high voltages but low amperages. This is why you see high tension lines which are not gargantuan. As the distribution systems near their end point, the voltages are stepped down and the amperages are increased. 250,000 volts at 5 amps isn't going to do anyone much good, but 240 volts at 5,200 amps will power 52 average homes.

Now let's look at EV's. The only practical way to store electrical energy is with a battery. Batteries are DC. Electric motors on cars can be either DC or AC, but generally the motors which actually drive an EV are AC motors. In order to charge a DC battery from an AC source you need a rectifier (which changes AC to DC), and then to consume energy out of that battery with an AC motor you need an inverter (which changes DC back into AC) between the battery and the motor. This translates into weight. More weight, more power required. More power, bigger battery required.

In the United states, most neighborhood (local) powerlines are 5,000 to 7,500 volts. At the power pole there is a transformer which typically steps this voltage down to 480 volts or 240 volts (we won't get into phasing, like 3-phase and bi-phase here).

Okay, now we have all the pieces and parts, so let's look at some of the challenges. EV batteries are much higher voltage than 240 or 480 volts (usually around 600 volts or so), so this means we have to add a transformer (again) to step-up the voltages. Transformers are not 100% efficient, so some power is lost (10% is a round number) in the conversion. But the bottom line here is there are only so many watts available at the service buss. For a residence this is usually ~48,000 watts, and for a business (depending on the type of business) a good value to use is ~240,000 watts.

If now we're going to siphon off say 7,200 watts (30A at 240v) to charge an EV, we've used 15% of our total residence's electrical service (3% of of our total for businesses) available wattage...for just a single charger. If a business wants to put in say (10) chargers, then 30% of their total available power has just been consumed. And here's the thing; it doesn't matter if there's only (3) cars plugged in, the same amount of power has to be dedicated. In other words, it's not based on usage, it's the Electrical Code. So why not just plug an EV into a standard 120 volt outlet? Well, you can, but then you're only getting 2,400 watts (roughly 1/3rd that of a dedicated charger).

If the same business has say 500 employees, and they want to put in (50) chargers, not even their entire incoming electrical service is enough to handle it at 360,000 watts (they only have 240kW at the service entrance). Now they're going to require a whole new electrical service in their facility which will cost $200k-$300k...to handle just the EV's...and only (50) EV's at that. What if all 500 of their employees have EV's, what then?

Okay, so let's just increase the voltage, right? Can't do that, facility electrical systems are not designed to operate at higher voltages (bad ju-ju happens then, very bad).

As you can see, this challenge doesn't scale very well at all! In fact, it gets exponentially more stupid the more EV's we add to the equation. We're not talking about just re-wiring someone's house here, we're talking about 'forklift' overhauls of entire metropolitan (cities) electrical distribution grids also, in addition to re-wiring all those businesses.

People say they'll gladly pay a fee to charge their EV. That's not even one one hundredth of one percent of the issue! How does $1 trillion dollars just to plug your EV in, and $80 million dollars a minute sound? That's the scale of misunderstanding we're talking about here! It's staggering.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Of course there is loss of energy in the transportation of electricity (along with conversion).

But oil has to be drilled, pipelines, barged, refined, and trucked.

The "wasted" electricity could be offset on site by solar as well.

Electricity can generally be generated closer to the point of consumption as well. Oil may be continents away, whereas electricity can be generated regionally.

There are certainly some hurdles, but nothing seems to make this harder than fossil fuels. It just happens to be new and different.

In my lifetime the internet rose from almost nothing, satellites providing real commercial applications, and a mobile phone infrastructure that changed how humans communicate.

We could certainly expand the existing eletric grid if the market wanted it. That part is key to me, the free market needs to decide, no one else.

In future we will be blockchaining the produced energy at least on the private sector, when 20 year contracts for renewable energy sources are running out.

This means we can factor in different things, a kWh from renewable will me more worth by a small factor, than coal or gas. This will be the new incentive to buy and install renewable energy systems, currently it's the monetary return, but that ROI is shrinking (planned) since years.

Here every new house needs to at least have 20% renewable energy coverage and the very new built ones need to install PV systems. First it was subsidized, today it's mandatory for new buildings. This was to introduce it to the market and have a baseload of users.

In the Swiss, this blockchain energy management already is partly implemented, not country wide but the partipicians are growing. The big power plants act as a bank while the users produce their own energy locally. This can simply mean that, if your nearest neighbor electrical wise is not at home but his PV system creates power and you consume power, it will come from that PV plant mostly. This is true today already because electrons, least way of resistance yadda yadda but in future it will be balanced on a blockchain.

The only problem in relation to EV is though, during the day when the sun shines, most EV are not at home, because people work. It's not viable to shuffle the energy back and forth from house to car battery, like some car manufactures plan to do. Someone I know a bit has a Tesla Wall Battery pack, since about two years (but no Tesla car) and he says he is very pleased, almost all the energy he uses is produced by the roof.

Electrification of private travel is coming, I love the ICE and everything around it, true petrol head here but it's put to death bed by manufactures willingly, it seems. I still have about 20-25 years where the ICE will be around though, even if no new ones are produced. Many ask my why I invest in ICE when I am talking like this about EV, truth is ICE will be around and need fixes, having the knowledge and tools now, will secure income in the future.

Also for hobby, the ICE will live on as long as gasoline and oil is available.