I ask why electric vehicles not self charging

a reply to: HorsePaster

Why is it so difficult to add solar panels?

It's not. The problem is keeping them working.

Cars have a lot of vibration. It's not just from the engine; it's also from the road. Even the smoothest riding car still has a lot of vibration in the body; the seats dampen what vibration the shocks and suspension can't.

Solar cells are pretty sensitive to vibration. The internal structure is quite brittle and they will crack and become useless if exposed to too much vibration. That's not something we know how to counteract at this time. So if one were to place solar panels along the roof, trunk, and hood, they would likely last only for a few days... certainly no more than a few weeks.

In short, it's not cost-effective to replace the solar cells every few weeks. No one is going to spend a few hundred dollars a month to keep something running that cost them extra to start with. Not to mention the sheer waste! It is quite difficult to recycle solar cells, and there's not that many rare earth metals as it is (hence the term rare earth metals). We would run out of solar cells pretty quickly.

On the other hand, it would be possible to build a solar charger in one's yard that would keep the batteries charged when the car was parked. The problem there is initial cost and area needed. Solar cells take a lot of space. But solutions to these problems are possible.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

There is newish tech that can build flexible and more productive solar energy, that is being looked into. There needs to me more of that, rather than it just can't be done rhetoric. Current solar panels are feeble and old tech. The things being looked at these days, remove these problems..

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

Some of them do, it's called regenerative breaking.

It's not very efficient. I don't think that it's worth the extra cost to have installed.

a reply to: jerich0

The flexible panels do not negate the vibration problem. It's not just that the structure cracks, but that the internal molecular composition separates. We have panels that can bend, yes, but we do not have panels that can withstand vibration.

One thing I am pretty big on is that I don't advertise something as possible until I have evidence that it is possible. History is rife with examples of scientific endeavors that failed; the news only reports those which succeed. But for every success there are likely hundreds (if not thousands) of failures. Edison spent how many years testing how many different configurations and materials before he had a light bulb that would do more than flash? It was quite a few. But no one cared about the light bulbs that didn't work; they only cared about the one that did.

So I put it to you: prove me wrong. Make a solar cell that will withstand the vibration inherent in a moving vehicle. A prototype is all I am asking for, not a production line. When you can do that, you will have proof that such a device is possible with current technology, and not just I, but every scientist across the planet, will have no choice but to accept it.

Until then it's just words.

Understand that i do not say this out of malice; I say it because I do it. I have a litany of projects right here that I believe will work... when I get them to work. Until that day, I rarely discuss them. Why should I? They are extraordinary claims without extraordinary proof. Just words. No substance.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: jerich0

The flexible panels do not negate the vibration problem. It's not just that the structure cracks, but that the internal molecular composition separates. We have panels that can bend, yes, but we do not have panels that can withstand vibration.

One thing I am pretty big on is that I don't advertise something as possible until I have evidence that it is possible. History is rife with examples of scientific endeavors that failed; the news only reports those which succeed. But for every success there are likely hundreds (if not thousands) of failures. Edison spent how many years testing how many different configurations and materials before he had a light bulb that would do more than flash? It was quite a few. But no one cared about the light bulbs that didn't work; they only cared about the one that did.

So I put it to you: prove me wrong. Make a solar cell that will withstand the vibration inherent in a moving vehicle. A prototype is all I am asking for, not a production line. When you can do that, you will have proof that such a device is possible with current technology, and not just I, but every scientist across the planet, will have no choice but to accept it.

Until then it's just words.

Understand that i do not say this out of malice; I say it because I do it. I have a litany of projects right here that I believe will work... when I get them to work. Until that day, I rarely discuss them. Why should I? They are extraordinary claims without extraordinary proof. Just words. No substance.

TheRedneck

Big ask of me, I can't even make a decent pizza that only I will eat.

My point was, it's being looked into. We will get to the stage where it won't be a matter of 'we cant' but rather one of 'we did!'

Look at the evolution of CGI. from bizarre incomprehensible ideas, to where we are now. That was because we thought we could. Otherwise, we'd still be using cartoons.

Every day someone tinkers with a concept. And every year we get new tech. Where there is a will, there is a way...

a reply to: anonentity

So not what you would see on cars, got it.

a reply to: jerich0

My point was, it's being looked into. We will get to the stage where it won't be a matter of 'we cant' but rather one of 'we did!'

Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. That is yet to be seen.

I know it is fun to imagine technology that seems like magic to us today. I do it sometimes as well, just as mental relaxation. But the hard truth is, we cannot violate the laws of physics. If those laws allow a thing, then perhaps someday we will have that thing. If the laws of physics do not allow a thing, all the wanting and wishing and predicting in the world won't make it happen.

AI has been "being looked into" for quite some time now. It's still not a reality. Oh, we have some pretty darn sophisticated routines that sometimes seem to mimic "intelligence" but we have yet to see any indication of a machine actually thinking.

Fusion energy has been "being looked into" as well. Yet today we are really no closer to successfully making a power plant that runs on fusion than we were, say, twenty years ago when it was all the rage. Maybe we'll figure out a way to do it, maybe we won't. But everyone who predicted fusion power in ten years back then now has egg on their face.

My point is that just because something is "being looked into," it does not follow that it must somehow succeed.

I hope it does succeed! I really do! But I can't say that it will because I do not know. Even those looking into more robust solar cells do not know. Time will tell.

TheRedneck

The major problem with Americans they are not too bright on the whole electric car thing. I finally received my 2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid a couple of weeks ago and everyone wants to know how long it take to charge and can I make it to the other side of the state before it needs charged.

No it doesn't plug in it has a gas engine and last weekend running around town I got 68.4 MPG. It gets 40 on the highway.

Need education not indoctrination.

Back and forth to work averaging 50 MPG

a reply to: mikell

Yes. A Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV), a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HPEV), and a fully Electric Vehicle (EV) are three different things. That's probably the education you mean.

A person asking if an fully electric vehicle can make it across a wide state (like Pennsylvania at abut 300 miles wide) is a valid question since 300 miles is longer than most EVs can go on a charge. Some can go 300+ miles, but most do not. It's not a valid question for someone with a hybrid.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: jerich0

My point was, it's being looked into. We will get to the stage where it won't be a matter of 'we cant' but rather one of 'we did!'

Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. That is yet to be seen.

I know it is fun to imagine technology that seems like magic to us today. I do it sometimes as well, just as mental relaxation. But the hard truth is, we cannot violate the laws of physics. If those laws allow a thing, then perhaps someday we will have that thing. If the laws of physics do not allow a thing, all the wanting and wishing and predicting in the world won't make it happen.

AI has been "being looked into" for quite some time now. It's still not a reality. Oh, we have some pretty darn sophisticated routines that sometimes seem to mimic "intelligence" but we have yet to see any indication of a machine actually thinking.

Fusion energy has been "being looked into" as well. Yet today we are really no closer to successfully making a power plant that runs on fusion than we were, say, twenty years ago when it was all the rage. Maybe we'll figure out a way to do it, maybe we won't. But everyone who predicted fusion power in ten years back then now has egg on their face.

My point is that just because something is "being looked into," it does not follow that it must somehow succeed.

I hope it does succeed! I really do! But I can't say that it will because I do not know. Even those looking into more robust solar cells do not know. Time will tell.

TheRedneck

It's not the laws of physics we are looking at. It's the lament fundamental way's we've done things. You don't need to break the laws of physics at all.

As I said if my first post, the laws of physics said we cannot fly... yet we've gone to the moon, and sent rovers to Mars.

Current thinking is but the start of new thinking... I have faith in that. Won't be today, tomorrow or next week, but it will be a thing, eventually.

Innovation is not a given, it's a chance.. I don't see why this is so wrong to you. Jumbo Jets from 1 minute crashed rides on a flimsy plane. In less that no time.. We are an uncanny species, we always fine a way.

originally posted by: jerich0
As I said if my first post, the laws of physics said we cannot fly...

They did? Where? People have observed birds flying for millennia and tried to emulate them.

You can buy a bicycle with a generator that rolls along your back rim to power a light, also if your cruising really fast I’m sure a small wind turbine might be able to power an electric Ching Ching horn if your going down hill if you want to be mr fancy pants. 🤯

originally posted by: Brotherman
You can buy a bicycle with a generator that rolls along your back rim to power a light, also if your cruising really fast I’m sure a small wind turbine might be able to power an electric Ching Ching horn if your going down hill if you want to be mr fancy pants. 🤯

Yes, put a generator on a bike wheel.. then peddle with it engaged, notice the minimal added effort needed.

Now with a meter, notice how at different speeds, different leg input 🦵, returns different levels of electricity. And then add a belt pulley instead of direct drive, mess with the ratios, then notice how you get much more electricity with much less 🦵 effort.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: jerich0

My point was, it's being looked into. We will get to the stage where it won't be a matter of 'we cant' but rather one of 'we did!'

Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. That is yet to be seen.

I know it is fun to imagine technology that seems like magic to us today. I do it sometimes as well, just as mental relaxation. But the hard truth is, we cannot violate the laws of physics. If those laws allow a thing, then perhaps someday we will have that thing. If the laws of physics do not allow a thing, all the wanting and wishing and predicting in the world won't make it happen.

.....

I hope it does succeed! I really do! But I can't say that it will because I do not know. Even those looking into more robust solar cells do not know. Time will tell.

TheRedneck

Now if we could get a electrolyser to split hydrogen from the water in the air efficiently enough, we could use some of it's energy to propel the car and some to split more water... not perpetual motion or anything, just efficiently collecting "fuel" from the air as we go and using part of that to collect more "fuel"....

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

Take a Physics class and get back to us.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Take a Physics class and get back to us.

It's better to work for a secret lab and the military, then you can do stuff that isn't based in reality.

a reply to: jerich0

As I said if my first post, the laws of physics said we cannot fly

No, they did not. Want proof? We can fly now. We simply cannot fly for long distances using individual power... we need rotating blades or fast-moving fixed-wing aircraft. Our present understanding of physics says, so far as we know now, that we cannot fly like a bird.

And that is not even a law of physics... it is a conclusion based on our understanding of physics. You are confusing laws of physics with state of technology.

What is being asked in this thread is why we cannot create energy from nothing. The answer is that there is no such thing as energy from nothing so far as we have found in the history of mankind, and we have been looking for it throughout much of that history.

Another similar thing we used to look for was a way to turn lead into gold. Believe it or not, we found a way! Nuclear bombardment works... but it is so expensive that it is completely impractical, even for gold. In other words, it is now known that it is impossible to turn lead into gold short of changing the atomic nucleus of lead.

Innovation is not a given, it's a chance.. I don't see why this is so wrong to you.

Ummm... how is that wrong to me? That is my entire point.

We are an uncanny species, we always fine a way.

No, we usually find a way and stay quiet about it unless and until we do.

TheRedneck

One would think a couple brushless alternators on an axle would extend the range.

I've alway thought they should make tire/rims that are wide at slow speed and become narrower at higher speeds. Similar to drag racing tires when they do a burn off. Make a rim/tire that morphs thinner for higher speeds and widens for slower speeds to reduce even more road friction.

originally posted by: NickK3

Now if we could get a electrolyser to split hydrogen from the water in the air efficiently enough, we could use some of it's energy to propel the car and some to split more water... not perpetual motion or anything, just efficiently collecting "fuel" from the air as we go and using part of that to collect more "fuel"....

Let's count the reasons why this won't work.

1. The amount of energy obtained from the Hydrogen would not be enough to replenish the energy used to move the vehicle and split the water.
That pretty much kills it right there.

2. The Hydrogen would need to be compressed and then stored. The compressor would take more energy.

I'm not even going to go into other things like electrical resistance, thermal losses, friction etc. etc.

We need to go back to teaching the hard sciences in our schools instead of the "feel good" environmental b*llsh*t being taught. The lack of understanding in basic Physics in these posts proves that.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I worked for a company that had designers who were all about looks. I worked in engineering where I had to take their designs and figure out how to build them. We had a meeting where they showed me their concept. I said that we couldn't make it as designed. I was told that I wasn't a team player, I didn't follow their vision. I told them that it didn't matter if I followed their vision or not. There were laws that I had to follow and the Laws of Physics was one of them. Their design couldn't stand on it's own. They still wanted their design and I told them that I'd make their design if they could tell me who to contact to get a waiver for the Laws of Physics.

You comment was dead on though. Especially if that "Government lab" had all of the non-existing stuff that they believe they have. Like Unobtainium.