This is electric-car-insider.com's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following electric-car-insider.com's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
electric-car-insider.com
San Diego
Electric Car Insider Magazine
Interests: electric cars, electric motorcycles, electric bikes, electric vehicles
Recent Activity
This is silly. You both know damn well Tesla is going to put a robotic arm on that semi to allow documents to be passed from weigh station and border personnel to the driver. Happy Thanksgiving!
Fair point, ai_vin. Tesla certainly could reconfigure the cab for the pickup/medium/heavy duty truck applications. The sketch that Musk showed off has one bucket seat visible, another very well could be obscured. I’m not convinced that the pickup shown is real though. It would be wildly impractical except for monster truck rallies, coach applications and class 3+ trucks.
Tesla said that the price of electricity at the megachargers would be $0.07. Considering that they own a solar and panel cell factory, utility scale battery manufacturing plant and nationwide installation crew, it seems reasonable to imagine that they could provide electricity for $0.07 within a few years. They have already proven adept at selling pre-paid fuel.
Whatever the non-compliance issues with the concept/prototype, it's likely that Tesla's offering will be much closer to the production than most of the wild flights of fancy we see when just about every other manufacturer shows off a concept/prototype. Agree that focus would be reassuring in the face of delays.
It was hard to figure out if that was just a sight gag or a serious peek at some future vehicle that would dominate in the mud-bog crowd. I agree, ai_vin, a motorhome based on this would be interesting. Hard to know how the solo driver position would go over, though. Also, megacharging along with the Semis would be less than optimal. Otoh, 240 overnight at an RV park would be easy, if not cheap. This is not just speculation, I've done both with my Model S.
You're right, CE, I should have said quickest. Musk did say the new Roadster would top out at 250 mph. I share your concern. People are already getting into trouble with the S and X. A doctor in Orange County California is facing manslaughter charges after killing a couple of commuters returning home from work.
Good to know that you’re looking out for the best interests of the poor fools who can afford to plunk down a $50,000 deposit on a $250,000 car, Davemart. It’s not like folks with that kind of scratch could figure out the risk profile of that kind of bet, right? Porsche sold the 918 for $800,000 - $1,000,000. Tesla will have buyers lined up for at least a similar volume production run of a $200-$250k car with better performance. I saw the Roadster do performance runs on the tarmac Thursday night. If you think Tesla, which already produces the worlds fastest production car, will have any trouble producing the Roadster 2.0, please short them heavily. The market will be happy to take your money.
Davemart, it’s comical to see you repeatedly try to conflate InsideEVs and Electric Car Insider, as if the people who read your posts also cannot make the distinction because the two businesses share a six character string. You’ve been told no less than four times here on GCC that there’s no relationship, yet you persist. Whatever you think you gain by the falsehood, carry on, it just makes you look more daft each time your repeat it.
You’d like to quibble over my rough approximations, Davemart? Have at it. I’d be surprised if anyone else missed the larger point. We’re entering an era where 200-300 mile all electric range will be routine. With continued innovation as Enevate presents here, longer distances reaching past 400 miles will be possible, but generally not very useful. Smaller and cheaper packs will be the goal.
Tesla batteries have increased in energy density over the course of the product life cycle. Other improvements have also increased range. The Model S 85 had an EPA rated range of 265 miles, and the current Model S 100 has a range of 335 miles. Whichever of these batteries you choose to compare, 300Wh/kg is an impressive increase and probably puts the same vehicle at or above 400 miles of range. Whether it’s 400, 500 or close to 600 is less relevant than the fact that over a given threshold, you simply stop worrying about range. Driving in town, you’ll never exceed 300 miles before you have to sleep again. For most people, the number of times that they take a trip out of town exceeding double that number (requiring a full charge) is so seldom that is not a great concern. Which is why Elon Musk is on record as saying you probably won’t see a Tesla with a battery bigger than 100kWh. He may be wrong, and he may not have been thinking about light duty trucks with tow bar when he made that statement, but in my experience over the course of 70,000 all-electric miles, over 300 miles capacity you just stop worrying about range. That includes dozens of trips over 1,000 miles and several over 2,000 miles round-trip.
Cylindrical cells have thermal management advantages. Larger prismatic cells develop hot spots. No doubt we will see a trend toward optimal form factor. Too many smart people and massive computing being applied for this problem to stand. 400Wh/kg does seem within reach. When it does, cars may be the least interesting transportation technology enabled by the breakthrough.
300 Wh/Kg at the cell level would not quite be double the gravimetric energy density of the Tesla battery, but in round numbers, not too far off. A 1,300 lb Tesla battery (current spec) could be nearly 180kW, which would yield a range of 588 EPA miles. I'm pretty sure we don't have to wait for 400+ Wh/Kg batteries for BEVs to compete effectively with FCEVs. Alternately, we could see a smaller, lighter, cheaper battery as Musk has indicated is more likely. 300+ miles of EV range means you stop worrying about range entirely, in my experience. Even in cold weather, batteries and cabins can be pre-heated and range loss kept to less than 20%
300 Wh/kg and 10C charging is an exciting breakthrough. Bravo, Enevate!
I get your exasperation, DaveD. Harvey loves to spec out cars just over the horizon, available someday, just not today. He needs 500 mile range with 5 minute recharge because after driving for 7 hours, he wants to get on the road and drive another 7 hours. That's his requirement, and he's stickin' to it. Until some automaker hits that spec for $30k and then by gum, he's gonna need 10 hours of driving and a two minute recharge time. I'll grant that Harvey does have some special requirements to meet, like not freezing to death if you get stuck on the side of the road for 30 minutes. Or the charge coupler not freezing in the socket if you leave your car plugged in for longer than it takes a cup of steaming hot coffee to turn into iced coffee while you're still drinking it. I once almost froze to death just crossing the street in Toronto in December. Those are hardy people up there I'll tell ya. My hosts laughed at my flimsy Southern California ski jacket and lent me a proper coat so I didn't take a place among the marble statuary. I hear you Harvey. It gets cold up there in the great white north. You need some headroom on your batteries. Somebody will deliver it someday, and maybe the "About" page will come with credits (and royalties no doubt) to Rice University.
Seems like a very well appointed, capable SUV for an excellent price. This will be a a must-have vehicle for the Electric Car Guest Drive. 120v aux power is an especially interesting capability as a factory option. Bravo Mitsubishi!
California limits rebate to single people who earn under $150k/yr. California increases the rebate to $4,500 for low income people who would not qualify for Fed Tax credit. When you say "We can and should do much better," what state are you writing from, SJC?
SJC, as the article says, these are rebates, not tax credits.
SJC: The “California Clean Air Initiative,” will ... provide rebates to help low- and middle-income families purchase new and used zero-emission vehicles...
Harvey, where are you getting the notion that California will have anything close to 400 H2 stations by 2020 "or so" Current projection is less than 100 by 2024: "Even with reduced vehicle projections, local and network-wide hydrogen fueling capacity are still expected to become a cause for concern around 2021 under business-as-usual station network growth assumptions. Additionally, the revised projection for network growth anticipates 94 stations by the end of 2023, if the State were to proceed at the current pace with the current station capabilities. The 100 stations referenced in AB 8 would be funded by this time, with some stations remaining in development at least through the bill’s expiration date of January 1, 2024." https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/ab8/ab8_report_2017.pdf
Never pass up an opportunity for personal attacks, Davemart, it builds your brand. Apparently pointing out that there are four hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the market, with possibly a few more coming within the next five years, and thirty-odd battery-electric and plug-in hybrids currently available with several dozen more slated for production within the next five years is enough to send you onto a frenzy. Got some money riding on this compressed gas technology? Send me the name of your local pub and I'll buy you a pint so you can properly console yourself.
Very impressive technology demonstration, and kudos to the engineers and developers (and sponsors) because this approach does point in the right direction of solving some of the basic, intractable problems with hydrogen; the cost of distribution. But sadly, the volume of this system would not keep very many FCVs in the road for long. 40 Nm³ Per hour is only 29 kg/hr at 1.01 bar : 14.69 PSI Modern FCVs want 700 bar : 10,000 PSI in the tank. 1 kg at 700bar ~ 60 miles 0.04 kg/hr of hydrogen will not get you very far on your daily commute, about 4 km = 2.5 miles.
An indication of which new drivetrain technologies will be available within the next few years is the plethora of announcements from automakers. There is a wave of commitments to electrify the entire product line, most recently from Volkswagen. For FCVs, not so much.
Impressive validation of Solid Power technology, and good news for the prospects of scale manufacturing. Kudos to both partners.
Bravo, Harvey, for impressive personal efficiency. I have LEDs but probably cancel out the energy savings with rather gluttonous use of computers around here.
I believe you are correct, mahonj, most people won't see 12,000 miles on 2,800 kWh, but on the MyNissanLeaf forum, there are a lot of people claiming ~ 240 watts/mile so maybe thwre are a lot of Leaf hypermilers out there (or people are self-limiting to ~9,300 miles year). With the new ultra-efficient Gen 2 cars coming out (Hyundai Ioniq BEV is 136mpge according to fueleconomy.gov) those DOE numbers could easily be achieved.