Overclock.net banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
Can someone enlighten me on why this is a big deal and why it's not rather common already?

I get that batteries are heavy, but I wouldn't think they would be that much heavier than a full fuel cell to make it a big deal. Obviously with larger jets those few extra pounds will add up quick, but with smaller aircraft like this one, it seems like it would be easy to someone like myself with zero knowledge or understanding.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
Pretty much the bold bit. The energy density of batteries is still a couple of orders of magnitude short of jet fuel, nowhere near enough to power a large plane for long. From Science Direct:



One other drawback is that planes get lighter as they burn fuel, extending their range, whereas batteries maintain the same weight throughout the flight.
Oh Lordie, didn't know it was that big of a disparity still. People talk like batteries have really closed the gap lately. Stupid me for not looking into the data itself and just rolling with what I hear.

Thanks for the heads up

Edit: Hard to imagine that the graph you linked is really just a tiny portion of the full graph of energy production. Rocket fuel converts what, like,3% of it's mass to energy?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
This is new? Lithium batteries have been around a while and even without them some short hop was possible.
70 nano meters sure is an easy range to achieve.
It does work for longer routes but not so much with heavy passengers and a heavy aircraft.
Reliability... probably miles better than controlled explosion engines.

Yes batteries are still insanely behind burnable fuels in energy density and weight.
lol, Nautical Miles not Nano Meters :p
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
This was true before the Model 3 because the battery system didn't have the active cooling capacity to dissipate the heat. It simply wasn't on the list of features they optimized for and surprisingly it wasn't even the batteries performance directly, but the fire protection system which limited the performance. However with the massive advancements they kept making, the 3's battery has been substantially redesigned to handle this kind of scenario. The Model S Plaid, and the Porsche Taycon are also just as track capable.

Nascar races usually get 100 miles or so per pitstop, which makes the range within the car's capabilities. There is of course still the um.. lets say significant difference in 'fueling' time. If you're talking about the 'ring as the Nurburgring, then the Taycon has records and the Plaid S already is unofficially playing with lap records there.
I bet they can't beat my Suzuki Escudo "Pike's Peak Edition" from Gran Turismo 2 though...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
It would be nice for consumers if they standardised on batteries, although a bit of a pain for designers. It would be very beneficial for commercial vehicles (trucks, forklifts, light aircraft, etc.), however for private vehicles like cars it would be a nightmare getting the various manufacturers to agree on a standard.

Remember how long it took for cell phone manufacturers to agree on using USB as a standard charging port (looking at you here, Nokia), and even then Apple went and did their own thing.
It's gonna be all but impossible to get hot swappable universal batteries since the functions of the vehicles varies so much.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
I just need a range of ~400 miles, then i'll be all in.

really though, I just want a Tesla. IDC how long it takes, my first electric will be a Tesla. (I figure the Civic will get replaced in 5 years time0
I'm gonna try and hold out for the first legit electric pick-ups. The Rivian and Bollinger are absolutely amazing, just a tad too pricy for me.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
There is still one big downside to electric vehicles, you need to have your own garage/driveway in order to be able to charge the darn thing. Anyone living in a place that has shared parking (apartments, condos, midrise etc..) is left not being able to charge at home. It's taking too long for Mr.Fusion to become a real thing.
That's exactly why I think the adoption rate of electric vehicles will be much slower than what most people think. A LOT of lower/mid level income apartments/condos/rent homes will likely never put that kind of infrastructure in. So basically the adoption rate will be mirrored onto the renovation rate of neighborhoods.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
Honestly, the strain on the power grid should be nominal at best. A charging station only uses a 30 or 40 amp breaker normally (about the same as an electric hot water Heater). The gradual transition to more power efficient appliances, better insulation, etc. etc. should be more than enough to offset that.

There will definitely need to be some infrastructure work done in certain locations like UPS hubs, truck stops and such, but its not like more lines will need to be run everywhere.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
And sadly both are like $2000+/mo for a really crappy apartment with 500sqft 1 bedroom with no parking, shared laundry, paper thin walls, awful neighbours, crappy environment and no AC in a building probably built 40-60 years ago.




I really am going to move away from the City as soon as I can.
If you can handle heat just fine, might I suggest looking into Dallas, Houston, or Austin Texas? Cost of living is way less, tons of good jobs to be had, and our construction in general is pretty high quality on account of our, lets say, semi-locally sourced high supply of labor.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
There are barely any curvy/windy roads, also getting a green card is a massive pain. Even though a its a million times easier that I'm from Canada. Moving to the US has always been on my radar, but I just think of it as not really possible due to the red tape of getting in.
Oh yeah, if you want winding roads and some beautiful scenery while being around a reasonable sized city, Texas is not where you want to be.

Never really understood why Toronto was so high end and expensive to be honest. Vancouver I get, but Toronto, Montreal, and those eastern cities just seem too darn cold.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
I calculated what would happen if Poland was to replace only the diesel stuff with electric.
Simple math based on diesel fuel sales and efficiency. For electric I assumed 100% efficiency for simplicity.

We are talking about around 1/3 of current Polish energy consumption.
That's a ton of energy that we don't have.

And it's not like renewables can provide it.
We don't really have the right climate for those.

It works but ROI time is rather long.
For solar panels usually 10-11 years, give or take 1-2 years depending on parts and labour cost.
With DIY installation the average goes down to 7-8 years, 6 is the minimum I would say.

We don't have nuclear because Chernobyl scared people and construction was stopped in 1990.
Two out of four reactors are used in foreign power plants with no issues.
Talk about stupidity.

So in our case it pretty much means more coal has to be burned to provide more energy for electric vehicles.

In Europe we don't need 30-40A breakers. Even your common modern apartment is provided with three phase 3x400V line (230V phase-neutral, 400V phase-phase, 120° shift). Each protected with 16A breaker. You can push quite some power through this and you only need three wires as neutral is not required for balanced loads. One such outlet will provide little over 10kW. This is with basic 2,5mm2 wires (14 AWG). Thicker wires=even more power.
IIRC my home has maximum power rating of 16kW but I would have to check.

US as far as I know uses two phase 2x120V (240V phase-phase, 180° shift) for most places or three phase 3x208V (120V phase-neutral,208V phase-phase, 120° shift) for more demanding loads.

But in either case you need to get the energy to the place.
Usually by running high voltage lines. In Poland it would be 15-30kV for short distance, 110/220kV for medium/medium-long range and 400kV for long range.

Those things are already running close to their limits.
Especially in regions with renewables (wind farms) where the energy goes back and forth as the production varies.

Not gonna pretend to be an electrician, but I can guarantee you are not pulling 10 kW/h thru 14 AWG wire. Pulling 1.5 kW/h thru 14AWG is pushing it.


And yes, diesel is gonna be the big one. Fortunately the vast majority of the diesel is consumed by semi's, construction, and farm equipment so you have very specific islands that are going to be required for charging those in the form of the shipping hubs, truck stops, and major farms. Construction by it's nature will likely never transition off of dependence on diesel, even if the vehicles themselves are electric, diesel generators will be required to charge them anyway. Those other places though, given how much they have to spend on fuel anyway, have a pretty sizable incentive to go totally off grid anyway and just build their own solar array/battery banks anyway for that purpose, similar to how some fab plants already have their own off grid power plants. In fact, i would be shocked if major shipping hubs weren't already looking in to moving their hub next to good sources of renewable energy like rivers, or untapped geo-thermal vents in preparation for when the EV tech becomes financially viable for semi's. The best and worst part of renewable energy is the scaling and while the switch to electric over diesel transportation may not drive their power consumption up to the point of making building a full on traditional power plant for themselves, the renewable method will absolutely still be a viable option.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
I can't imagine a semi-truck hauling 80,000 pounds using electric motors of any variety. The batteries required to haul loads like these would be astronomically heavy and/or the ranges ridiculously short.
The only reasons semi's aren't already going full electric are long term durability (those diesel motors can log well over a million miles), up front cost, and to a lesser extent charging infrastructure. Electric engines that have enough torque already exist, and a normal semi has a load capacity of 24 tons, setting aside say 4 tons, dropping the load capacity to 20 tons or something would probably give that bad boy enough juice to go coast to coast without a re-charge. Also, as previously stated, the acceleration eats up the vast majority of the power, so once fully autonomous semi's come out where a driver is allowed to exceed 10 hours a day on the road, I fully expect them to be completely electric.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
Wow, nice find, that's pretty slick. Scrolling through it appears to be still in testing/concept phase though :(

Looks like they are even closer to being on the road than I originally thought though.

edit: The price is actually reasonable too considering the savings on diesel at $150,000. Shame the drive distance is only 300 - 500 miles on a charge. If not for that I would say they are amazingly viable.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
quick math tells me that a semi driver can get almost 1,000 miles before legally being required to stop driving and rest. I wonder why Tesla isn't targeting that 1,000 miles between charges?

edit: that 1000 figure is going 70 non stop for the entirety of the run. Set aside 3,000 lbs and about $15,000 and you can put a 50+kw diesel generator on there to push it up to that mark, and let you charge the batteries while you are on your off time if you happen to be in the middle of nowhere. Oh well, I'm gonna go off on a limb and say Tesla and Freightliner have their reasons and know a wee bit more about the subject then me /shrug
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
14AWG can sustain 16A of continuous current under most common home conditions.
In a three phase system three 14 AWG wires can supply little over 10kW without exceeding those limits.

Three phase system are more efficient if you are looking at saving wire.
You add one wire but you triple the available power.
But that's not the end of advantages. After rectification the voltage never goes down to 0.
So the filtration needs are lower. Less capacity is required to achieve decent ripple which means lower cost.
Wikipedia explains it rather well with simple graphs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectifier#Three-phase_bridge_rectifier_uncontrolled

The thing with power over cable is that cable losses are calculated with Power_Losses=Current*Current*Resistance.
And Power=Voltage*Current. Twice the current means four times the losses. Double the voltage, halve the current and you get four times lower losses.
So if you want to make more efficient transmission lines you increase the voltage to decrease the current.
Chinese right now are using 1100kV transmission lines for this exact reason. Plenty of coutries around the world prefer the 220-240V standard at home because of savings.

The simplest comparison.
USA uses 120V, Europe 230V.
At 16A it means 1920W for USA and 3680W for Europe.
Same wire used in both cases.

As for car charging stations I know a guy from univeristy who was making his engineer's thesis based on a project of such charger. So he got me interested in the subject.
For europe the chargers are simpler because they don't really need much power conversion to happen.
Three phase 3x400V gets rectified to around 565V DC (peak, will drop slightly under load).
Most fast chargers use 400-800V DC. The voltage is already there.

For 240V AC supply based from two phase system (used commonly in US) to achieve a similar voltage you may use a voltage doubler (simple, two diodes, two capacitors) but also an active boost converter.
The second beeing "nicer" as the apparent power (rectifier with capacitors is drawing non-sinusoidal current, creating distortion) is far lower, allowing savings on infrastructure (wiring, transformers).

Well, in most cases charging stations have their own dedicated transformers, stepping down from 15-30kV to supply all the charger with the much needed power.
So in the US I guess that they simply used higher voltages on transformer output to allow simpler power conversion.

Fair enough, I will take your word for it. Still in my mind it sounds incredibly dangerous to dump that much voltage (enough to push 10 kw/h) through 14awg wire. I'm likely not getting exactly how it works correct, but the higher the voltage, the more likely it is to jump and spark, right? So at those levels, even a minor tear or rip in the shielding or a loose connection on a switch or outlet would be a disaster and I don't care how diligent you are on upkeep, being one dumb rat, or errant nail in the wall is gonna happen eventually, and when it does, bye bye house.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
A large quantity if not a majority of goods/raw materials shipped over long distances (Coast to coast) is done by rail, not semi-truck.
I have no cognitive idea where you get that idea at. I worked at the UPS distribution hub in Dallas. It handled all packages going into and out of the state of texas. There were no rail lines to our facility. There was on average around 200 semi's unloaded and another 200 semi's loaded every day. Now I work in a stone yard, were we get semi loads of stone from nation wide, none of them come by train. Just go to the nearest major interstate any time day or night, and spend 15 minutes counting semi's, extrapolate from there and you will get a sense of how much actually gets sent by semi rather than by rail.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
BTW we have kinda derailed the topic here - Just sayin.
Eh, we are still somewhat on topic. Use of electric powered vehicles for transportation.




It's not based on how your facility operates or what "it" sees.
In short:
Your facility doesn't see these rail cars because it's not supposed to.
The catch there is I actually own/operate the business, so I handle all the shipping from start to finish and in 15 years, off the top of my head, I can think of only one stone quarry in Minnesota that shipped via railway, at least here to Dallas. That said we aren't handling extremely large orders, usually only in the 100-1,000 tons per order range.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top