Re: Electric cars, cheap

I can't comment om most of the stuff posted here because I'm working and don't have a whole lot of time to spend. I'll have to save that for 10 or 15 years from now when I have more free time. Heck, maybe bikes will be flying by then. That would be cool.

Reply to
dsi1
Loading thread data ...

You are right - I did not. That's why I did not say anything about fossil-fuel electrical generators. I did not say anything about which month of the growing season was best for planting geraniums or which perambulators are best for snowy climes either.

You guys can try to suck me into your endless discussion on this but you should find better ways to spend your time.

Reply to
dsi1

The thing is, you made that statement, without qualifying it or comparing it, and it implies that things are somehow better with electrical generation and EVs.

Many of the people here on RCM understand engines and know some basic physics -- they understand that heat engines are the same all over, whether you're talking about the best IC technology in a car, or the best combined-cycle turbomachinery in an electrical generating station. The net output, as a source of power for a car, is about the same in either case.

Heat engines of all types are inherently inefficient. That's just a physical fact. And producing hydrogen for fuel cells falls into the same category. The only thing that will break you out of that set of physical fact is an alternative energy source that doesn't involve a heat engine.

Are we on the same page here?

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Not only do you have trouble with paragraphs, you have trouble with letters: CO2..... get it? AND, supposedly, we have too much of it. Altho, truth be told, plants do a perty good job of mining it for us.... lol

False. Was just commenting on potential resources. Do you EVER stop lying? Silly me... the answer is of course No. And yeah, half the weight -- if assholes like you didn't demand 150 airbags/cupholders/etc.

He just keeps firing this stuff out in a bizarre

And, dumbfuck, it looks like GM agrees with me.... eh? LOL Hmmm, what were the last links me, jb posted? Gm will be lowering the cost, lowering the weight, shrinking down the genset??

The only colossal fails are yours:

  1. Reading comprehension
  2. Honesty.
  3. Inability to calc ROI
  4. Inability to calc. relevant average prices of cars wrt electrics.
  5. Inability to get GMs dick out of your mouth/ass
  6. Inability to understand how your own car works. Oh, Mommy, Lookee, GM regulated the temp of my batteries.....
  7. Oman, my fingers are getting tired.
Reply to
Existential Angst

No, you meant 99 alright, and now you're weaseling.

I understand that you're an obsessed windbag not to be taken seriously.

Ah, so the Angst garage has given up on the one ton $20k version, and has accepted the two ton $30k version, along with all the airbags and computers, which it is going to hack to provide for a rolling emergency charge! And it's going to add battery heating and cooling, automatic control of the ICE, and test everything to mass market safety standards!

It's not a point, it's a fact. You aren't even going to modify an existing car, and couldn't if you tried.

... just like most of your ideas. YOU can't build a get me home genset onto a Leaf unless you intend only running it when the car is parked. The people who've hacked a running charge use extra batteries to do it, thereby improving the odds of getting something from the kluge more often, rather than merely hauling it around just in case.

But you CAN'T do it! You can't even do a good job of talking about it!

They could do it, but they won't because it's not a practical idea.

No, forget that part entirely. A Leaf with a backup genset would weight more and cost more than a Volt.

Mix and match gensets aren't crackpot. They're merely impractical for mass market, which is why despite they're having been proposed years ago, nobody other than niche marketers have pursued the idea.

What's crackpot are your declarations about there being a market, about weight (particularly carbon fiber), of what "most" RCM readers are capable of, about the bigs only including airbags and computers in order to cater to fool buyers, about hybrid EVs being fundamentally simpler than regular vehicles, and your general theory that every problem in your mind is somehow a butt penetration conspiracy. I'm sure I forgot a few but I confess to mostly only scanning your nonsense once I discovered you actually believed in your rants.

Reply to
whoyakidding's ghost

I actually meant to type 99.9%, but I forgot. You are one MEGA asshole, who will stoop to anything to win. Couldn't expect less from a gummer-stalker.

I already commented on that. Yer a li'l late.

What part of get-me-TF-home don't you understand?

20 kW is good for over 20 hp -- ackshooly, 27 hp -- more than enough to get home.... level ground would help, but dats what a sucka gets for running out of batt juice....

You haven't shown that. You insist on it, cuz GM's dick is battering your brain, but you haven't shown it. Indirectly I HAVE shown it: The Volt is, uhhh, what, halting production and slashing prices, are they?? Gen 2 is being sig'ly modified????? Hmmmmm....................

I already addressed that. My conclusion was that a modified Volt could ackshooly be a bargain. You need to start paying attention.... silly me.... confabulation makes paying attention moot.

It was mix'n'match batts and gensets... Cites?

there is.

It's just a matter of time. I know the current cost of carbon fibre, was not proposing it for now.

of what "most" RCM readers

They are.

about the bigs only including airbags and computers in

I believe I said "assholes like Kidding"....

about hybrid EVs being fundamentally

THEY ARE!!!!

and your general theory that every

That's beyond any reasonable doubt. You wouldn't notice cuz you've had someone's dick in your ass/mouth proly since you were 5 years old. Me, I notice.... and I don't like it.

I'm

I think you need to go back to stalking gummer..... it's more your speed. Can you stalk gummer while you drive your Volt?? Fuuck, your chubby proly would stuck in the steering wheel!!!

Reply to
Existential Angst

You seem to be chirping right in there.

Reply to
Existential Angst

WTF part of _YOU can't do anything like that_ don't YOU understand?

Feel free to explain EXACTLY how you imagine you're going to kluge a

20kW genset onto a running Leaf. Start by detailing the mods to the existing electronics. Don't bother with the diversion about Nissan figuring it out, stick to how YOU or Gunner is going to do it.
Reply to
whoyakidding's ghost

Almost.... :) Heat engines that operate at very high temps can be very efficient. Carnot, again.... Practical to build? mebbe not. But the theory is there. Diesels are a good example of this -- and of The Conspiracy -- if you followed my other rant. LOL

Reply to
Existential Angst

Those figures are the core of the argument.

We (the STEM Aware) have known since the early 1700s that engines are inefficient, and since 1823 how to quantify it. A math-free Outcome-Based Education goal of feel-good consciousness raising contributes nothing useful to this debate.

Reply to
Jim Wilkins

I think we can be on the same page. It's a most reasonable page.

Reply to
dsi1

It is was it is and will be what it will be. I look at current averages, or as close as I can find. It's all just ballpark. I haven't found a comprehensive analysis. Everything else is speculation, or cherry picking. BTW, since we're including electricity line and charge/recharge losses against electricity, we might as well charge gasoline/diesel 15% energy lost in refining, then add transport losses. I'm pretty secure in my belief the electric is more efficient than ICE currently, on average.

Renewables and lessening coal use is already here. Renewable generation passed nuclear last year. Not that I see a big increase in renewables in the near future, what with the glut of NG. BTW, I'm a fan of nukes, but only if they are spread out and built smaller scale than currently done. They WILL go rogue. Losing 10-20 square miles to half-life decay rates now and then is acceptable to me. Losing hundreds to thousands of square miles isn't. My "excitement" about electric cars is purely operating cost driven. Since I pay 4-5 cents kwh for electricity, and +$4.00 for a gallon of gasoline, there's just no contest. Not even close. Of course that's regional, and a weakness in using "averages." The initial cost of the electric car is the killer for me, especially since I only buy used cars. Don't think I'll ever have an electric, but they'll probably be the preponderant means of transportation in the future. Can't imagine otherwise. But who knows?

Reply to
Vic Smith

But they don't, because they're limited by materials that will work.

Jet engines are limited to around 2500 deg. F, because that's the brick wall with superalloys. Ceramics aren't there yet, and may never be. Many have tried. Piston engines can hit 5000 deg. F. They have a cooling cycle and turbines don't.

Just to confuse you, the peak flame temperature in a diesel engine is slightly less than for a spark-ignition gasoline-fueled engine.

You're looking at the Carnot cycle through the wrong filter. In the case of the diesel, the efficiency (at full throttle) is the result of higher mechanical compression, not higher flame temperature. The consequence is higher BMEP because the gas is expanding from a higher initial pressure at combustion.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

And that's where you're exactly right, and why I agee that thus far GM and Nissan missed the mark. I don't know if it's possible to hit the mark with an electric, but wish they had tried. I'm thinking the Bug, though entirely different, is sort of an example. Far from perfect in many ways. But cheap, and they worked. When I first saw them, I thought they were stupid little things to be passed by 350 Chevys and 352 Fords. But when it came time to put my money down, I bought one myself. It worked costwise. I'm still hoping GM makes the Volt work with a different version.

Reply to
Vic Smith

Right. Just like diamonds. But most people can just buy cubic zirconia to get almost the same bling. Not so easy with gas, which is widely needed, and currently has no real substitute. Just as De Beers companies control diamond production and strongly influence prices, a limited number of people control oil production and just as easily remove gas price from the sphere of competitive supply/demand. That's leaving aside the distorting influence of future speculators. And all of that is what will make electric work. Pretty sure many will adopt electric just to pass by gas stations, roll down their window and shout "Fuck you!" That works for me. I'd really enjoy it. Just not enough to cut off my nose.

Reply to
Vic Smith

Well, we were talking about thermal efficiency. Thermal efficiencies of various heat engines are quite well known. Costs, however, are all over the place. In the UK, the per-mile price advantage of operating a Nissan Leaf is extreme. In the US, not so much.

Then add mining and transportation losses for coal (37% of US electricity production) and fugitive gas lost in pumping and piping natural gas (pick your favorite percentage -- probably 4%; gas is the source of 30% of our electricity). Power plant losses include 5% of electricity generated (internal plant losses and operations).

And on, and on. The best and most thorough analyses are the ones done over the past decade or so by Argonne National Labs.

I doubt it. We haven't even touched on electric-motor losses, not counting friction losses to make it comparable to thermal efficiency of an IC engine.

Not according to EIA:

formatting link

That's a pretty unusual ratio. US retail consumer rate averaged 11.88 cents/kWhr in April. Regular gas is around $3.63.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Simply kill file him. He doesnt have much longer to live, so simply close him out and let him die alone.

Reply to
Gunner Asch

Must be nice. I pay nearly .35 cents per KWH

Reply to
Gunner Asch

In principle, I am. Where, exactly, is the problem?

Reply to
Existential Angst

What about average combustion temp??

You'll have to plug shit into PV=nRT for me..... proly not worth the trouble. lol But pv = nRT sez higher compression, higher temps.

Altho, actually, it just dawned on me what you are saying. The combustion process and the associated delta H's, and associated T's of combustion may not be the same as the T in pv = nRT from the pure compression of a gas.... inneresting. wow.....

So is the higher efficiency of a diesel then due mostly to the higher heat content of the fuel itself?? Or is the cycle itself more efficient? Or both?

Reply to
Existential Angst

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.