Alt text:
An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that’s the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.
The motors have never been the problem, it’s always been the battery. See train engines, they are a diesel generator with electric motors.
This is where history pisses me off. We should have been headlong into battery research after the oil embargoes. Could have been 40 years faster.
I think people forget that petroleum is condensed and distilled solar energy. One gallon of gasoline is the results of years of solar energy.
Spelling
Renewable fuels exist and are used today, but the efficiency and pollution aspects still apply.
oops you posted irrelevant pedantics that verge on misinformation 😧
sure it’s distilled solar energy that cannot be renewed. relevant language highligted. no one “forgets,” this. literally no one. it’s just not relevant to a timespan less than millions of years. cheers! ☀️
Um piss off. It is not irrelevant or misinformation. That is exactly what petroleum is.
You clearly can’t understand a factual statement from an opinion I never said it was good I never said it was bad I just said it was. If you’d bother to take a moment to think about it. You would realize that I was referring to the fact that petroleum is extremely energy dense. For the very reason I stated. That is fundamentally why petroleum has become a successful energy source and why it’s been so difficult to replace.
You’re welcome to point out where I said it was renewable. I think you’re going to have a difficult time finding that statement.
As for being a pedantic ass that’s clearly your territory. A pedantic ass that it likes to put words in other people’s mouths.
I hope you are not talking about battery locomotives.
With overhead wires the train has a practically unlimited battery capacity.
Oil is honestly an amazing product, chemistry wise there is so much we can do with it and energy wise it’s a extremely concentrated and easily transported form of energy.
Energy wise one liter of oil is equivalent to 10 person working for a day !
I repeat, using one liter of oil is like having 10 “slaves” working for us for a day.
Its easy to see why oil became the base of our modern civilization, and easy to see why we don’t manage to stop using it even though it’s destroying us.
Not really. Battery tech has always been advancing. Even today electric vehicles have barely come up with anything new, battery wise. Everyone wants something better than lithium base. No one can get anything to market.
It advanced at a glacier pace because there was no massive driving force. It only kicked off a bit with cell phones and then in any substantial way with laptops. (Yes, batteries existed before that for different things, but there was no massive driving force.) Now imagine what would have happened if we funded it starting in the 1970s.
Didn’t sodium batteries start getting marketed recently?
Yes, but no one’s even glancing at it for use in vehicles. The one that’s finally getting into production is 70wh/Kg. Not nearly energy dense enough yet for ev’s. Lithium batteries are closer to 300wh/Kg. In other words, they take up 1/4th the space and weight. EV’s are already a thousand pounds heavier than non ev’s and that’s already causing extra tire pollution issues and having to overbuild suspension parts and bearings. Making them another 3,000 pounds heavier than that is just out of the question. Let alone making the space to fit the battery.
Sodium is going to change the world with its power storage capabilities connected to solar. Anyone on like 75% of the planet could 100% live off the electric grid problem free with enough solar panels and a big sodium storage battery.
pretty sure most trains are powered by either overhead wires or third rails? considering that urban rail systems are always electrified and those have A LOT of trains.
okay? i’m talking about the world though, so typical for people to just assume america is all that matters lmao
Exactly this. Imagine if gas powered motor could recharge in mere 12 hours and run for up to half the distance. Ah, that would be the dream.
And if you and 5 of your neighbors decide to refuel at the same time during peak hours you have a real chance of overloading your neighborhood grid. And your fuel tank is dead in 5 years, replacing which is more than half of your used cars cost.
Everything non-portable uses electric motors from the time the first wire was invented.
I am being serious - can you factually counter those points? I’d like to know the truth of the matter.
When you look at fueleconomy.gov you will see that the furthest a compact ev can go is 149 miles while the furthest a ice compact car can go is 594 miles
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/01/why-the-ev-boom-could-put-a-major-strain-on-our-power-grid.html You can read cnbcs article on how the grid is already pretty spread thinn with us already increasing our power demand by almost 3,000% in the last decade without even considering ev charging
https://www.motortrend.com/features/how-long-does-it-take-to-charge-an-ev/
According to motor trend DC charging is the fastest way to charge your EV and it still takes just under two hours Couldn’t find a source that studied how long a ice takes to recharge but considering how ices are currently extremely common you can easily test that yourself and probably already know it’s so quick you don’t even think about it
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a31875141/electric-car-battery-life/
According to car and driver those lithium ion batteries you mentioned while yes they can last a decade most cars typically stay on the road for give or take 30-35 years and lithium ion batteries are inherently expensive and prone to thermal cascading ie catching fire also full charge and depletion wears the battery down over time
https://www.edmunds.com/electric-car/articles/electric-car-battery-replacement-costs.html According to Edmunds.com the average cost of ev battery replacement costs anywhere from 5,000$ to 15,000$ So what point was made up
“On the other hand gas has a much higher energy density than batteries and a much faster refuel rate.”
It’s exactly this. Convenience. We’ve become accustomed to how convenient it is and don’t want to be put out.
On the other hand, it’s super convenient to never go to a gas station again, and to wake up to a full tank. So if you drive less than 60 miles a day, and have acess to another car for long trips, an electric is even more convenient.
That’s basically 90% of every car owner.
It’s one of those things where people feel like they’re going to take a road trip every weekend, but most people are just using their car to commute to and from work and maybe take one or two longer trips per year. The time saved by not having to stop at a gas station throughout the the year is less than the additional time taken at a fast charging station for the rare road trip.
Unfortunately, people tend to buy vehicles to best accomplish 1% of their driving. I live in the suburbs and almost every house has a giant pickup parked in front. Not because people are in the construction business and need to haul a lot of stuff, but because once a year they might go to Home Depot and it feels good to put their two bags of mulch in the back.
Or just use the clothes dryer circuit… Charge the car overnight… Get all the range.
You don’t even need the clothes dryer circuit, the vast majority of people don’t drive enough in a day to need anything more than a standard 15a outlet
it’s super convenient to never go to a gas station again, and to wake up to a full tank
But, to make that possible, you basically have to have a “gas station” at home. If you own your own house you can modify it to install a charging spot. If you rent, you might not have that option.
All EVs come with Level 1 chargers that plug in to your standard house outlet, NEMA 5-15R. If there’s an outlet nearby you can charge your car.
That can still be difficult for apartment renters, but there’s no need to modify your house.
Are those two things actually important?
Electric motors are a lot more efficient, and battery technology is quickly approaching the place where you can get the same range with an electric motor as with an ICE.
As for refuel rate, I spend no time waiting for my car to charge because it charges at home while I’m sleeping, so the refuel rate doesn’t matter.
Plus the technology to battery swap is well in use for electric vehicles (see Nio, who have thousands of battery swap stations in China and some in Europe too). 3 mins and you have a full battery.
It matters to people who drive more during the day than their range allows. They don’t want to wait 20 minutes for the car to charge every time they venture 300km out and back /s
Why do people still pretend it takes longer than 20 minutes to get a 50% charge increase?
Why /s? Road trips are a thing, and you’d be hard pressed to find a combo restaurant/charging station that’s along your path.
Although own an electric car, I believe range is still an issue. I was specifically addressing fuel density and charging time. EVs have their issues, but I believe they will be solved over time even though they are unlikely to beat an ICE in fuel density or charge rate for a long time. But I don’t think those things are actually important, because the problem is solved in a different way.
Yes, for people who can’t charge at home. I’d love to swap to electric, but 1 hour trip to go charge the car at the nearest charging station is not realistic - especially since I’d need to do it twice as often as 10min trip to refuel.
Also there’s the EV prices, starting at 2-3 times more than my current whip lol
My point is that we should be focused on the outcomes we want. It isn’t really important that fossil fuels are a lot more energy dense if the electric cars can travel twice as far. They can’t, but I’d be willing to bet we will get to that point with fossil fuels still being more energy dense.
But also as I mentioned in the comment you relied to, Nio have a vast network of battery swap stations where you can get a full charge in a couple of minutes, the same as filling up at a gas station.
The price of EVs are a problem, and not the only problem, but my point was that the specific things mentioned don’t stop us having better EVs than ICEs, because we will get the same outcome in a different way.
Are those two things actually important?
yes, they are. they make difference between actually usable technology and engineer’s dream.
Electric motors are a lot more efficient, and battery technology is quickly approaching the place where you can get the same range with an electric motor as with an ICE.
i doubt we even have enough rare metals for 8 or 16 billion batteries. most of them are being mined in politically unstable or to western civilization unfriendly countries, with terrible effect on the environment.
efficiency matters, it is not a question of how good single battery is.
As for refuel rate, I spend no time waiting for my car to charge because it charges at home while I’m sleeping, so the refuel rate doesn’t matter.
oh good. YOU have it solved, so the rest of the world does not matter, i assume…? fuck all these people, right?
Hey mate I’m just here for some friendly discussion, I’m not here to argue until I’m blue in the face.
There is a difference between your above points and the original claim.
Fuel density doesn’t matter, what matters is how far you can drive on a charge.
Charge time doesn’t matter if you can swap a battery in 3 minutes instead of waiting to charge.
For your new point of rare earth materials, this isn’t related to the original energy density or charge time points, but high density batteries that don’t use rare earth metals already exist, the problem is cost. That will change over time.
Also you’re ignoring that fossil fuels are also dug out of the ground.
On the one hand the Nokia 3310’s battery lasts a week. On the other hand the iPhone 15…
Just plug your car in when you’re not using it like you’d charge your phone overnight. It’s only a problem if you can’t charge at home (due to on street parking and no charging facilities on that street) and you can’t charge somewhere you usually take your car (eg a workplace).
Nope,it’s a problem in many other scenarios
If i ride to vacation to a country with no charging infrastucture, if I want to ride to the mountains where it is subzero and my range drops dramatically, if I go to a place where it’s 38 deree celsius and I need AC my range is pretty much fucked up… (not to mention that close to remote places like cool beaches there is no charging station)
If I want to have a road trip… i suddenly becomes a planning issue
There are still so many things that are complicated by having a EV, and I don’t need the extra complications
So you agree that we should heavily invest in building EV charging infrastructure?
Dude…
Norway is incredibly sparsely populated and has an adoption rate of 80%+. We also have stupid cold winters, loads of fucking mountains and require AC in summer.
I’ve driven through Europe twice with no more than 2 minutes of planning in an app.
Your comment makes me think you have no experience with EV’s at all and are spreding false claims.
There are literally two scenarios where an EV is not better than ICE (if purchased new today).
One is for people frequently traveling far beyond the cars range and the other is for people without access to AC charging at all.
And no, I’m not a EV lover/gasoline hater. I ride a motorcycle powered by dinosaur juice too. I just like having 400+ BHP and 700 Nm of torque in a car priced like a Toyota Avensis, and a full tank every single time I leave my driveway with said full tank costing me <$5.
You should want that too unless you belong to one of the two exeption groups above.
If you don’t drive for work–and I mean get paid to drive hundreds of miles every day, not just a long commute–or take a road trip every month, and have a place to charge at night (most people do, at least in North America), then an EV is just better.
Otherwise, a plug-in hybrid or a “gasoline boosted EV” like a Volt is sufficient. ICE cars for regular people shouldn’t have even existed once the Volt proof of concept was proven!
But remember, electric motors also require next to no maintenance and can last for many years of runtime. Pros and cons.
Uh, maintenance is one thing where ICE wins (until very recently, thanks fucktards in car industry). Cars have been generally very easy to work on, with anyone with a toolbox being able to do most their repairs in a shed
That’s a user-hostile feature, not a property of electric engines. An electric car has far simpler mechanical parts, and the circuitry isn’t very complicated either. It could be made incredibly easy to repair, modify, and upgrade, mostly at home even, if they designed them that way
This isn’t a function of the engine though right? Electric engines are inherently simpler and should therefore be easier to maintain (putting aside company fuckery)
High voltage is scary as fuck, but also the fact that absolutely everything from doors to gas pedal and chairs are controlled by a computer you need specialized proprietary equipment to investigate.
This is an issue with new ice cars too to be honest
Real answer: power density. Pound for pound, gas still contains more energy than our best batteries. The weight of energy storage is still a massive deal for anything that cannot be tethered to a grid or be in close practical proximity for frequent recharging, from rockets, planes and cars (sometimes) to chainsaws and lawnmowers (sometimes).
Thing is that pound of gas is gone, that pound of battery is still there and ready for recharge.
A pound of dead battery doesn’t help me when I’m camping 10km from the nearest access to the power grid. (There are actually powerlines not even a kilometre from my favourite campsite, but those are going to be measured in kV, and so aren’t really useful to me.)
Now, if I had enough solar panels in a mobile setup, probably folding out of a trailer, I could make it work, but solar panels are expensive.
Do we ignore fuel distribution costs? How much fuel is required to distribute fuel to the stations? Shipping oil from high-conflict areas?
Electric is stipl very much problematic, with the coal burning. But at least it has a lot of headroom to improve, and can be produced locally.
Oh, and my fucking lungs mate.
Density is relative to efficiency, and electric wins
What i cannot understand is people trying to defend something that is clearly worse,
Googling tells me that:
- Electric cars have 77% efficiency
- Gas cars have 30% efficiency
- Electric car batteries have 270 Wh/kg (converts to 0.97 MJ/kg)
- Gasoline has 46 MJ/kg
So the math here says electric gives you (0.97 * 77%) 0.75 MJ/kg output and gas gives you (46 * 30%) 13.8 MJ/kg output. Plus, as someone else said, spent gasoline no longer weighs you down.
I like the idea of electric, and I want to see it replace gas as soon as possible, but fair is fair.
And let’s not forget that fueling your car requires a tank, a decently sized pump and 2 minutes of your time. A quick charge will hopefully charge your battery to 80% in 30 minutes, while giving you less km and running 300kW of power through hefty cables and big transformers, consuming the amount of energy that a family house consumes in a few days.
(And yes, battery manufacturing and disposal consume enormous amount of resources)
Electric and gas have different situations in which they shine. Gas/diesel engines are just a bunch of steel and some control chips, optimized in more thana century of technological development if we couls develop carbon neutral fuel, electric cars would not be needed. Unfortunately, it woulf be difficult to do at scale of current fuel consumption. More (electric, battery-less) public transport, less road goods transportation, more nuclear, electric for vehicles that move 100% of the time (delivery and logistic vehicles) and carbon-free fuel for other kinds of vehicles (personal transportation) is a good balance, in my personal, ignorant, armchair opinion.
The argument that I’ve heard is that electric cars aren’t actually cleaner because of the pollution caused by mining the minerals required for the batteries.
I’m sorry but I’m too lazy to dig up links to back up my claim. But you are correct in that electric vehicles pollute far more being produced than combustion engine cars, however the electric vehicles gain that back over it’s lifetime if your charge from mostly non-fossil sources. The figures I have read says that over the lifetime of a car, electrics output 70% less CO2 than combustion cars, and that includes the production of each of the cars.
The price. The price is the problem for all us poors.