EV real world range and cost to charge

[lol-lol]

6 hours ago, roottoot said:

 

 

 

Does she even mention "Heat Pumps"  ?????

If you want a car with longer range, and you want to use the cooling and heating, then you buy an EV with a heat pump, or spec it if your Skoda or Tesla does not have it on some cases.

 

Same for a replacement tumble dryer at home, considering the price of energy the capital cost of a heat pump version of the car or kitchen appliance etc looks like making sense.

 

 

 

[Ootohere]

The PSA / Stellantis EV's have a heat pump.

Just how poor would efficiency be if they did not because with it is garbage.

[lol-lol]

1 hour ago, roottoot said:

The PSA / Stellantis EV's have a heat pump.  Just how poor would efficiency be if they did not because with it is garbage.

 

Ten or fifteen miles less than currently ie model with the heat pump.

 

PSA/ Stellantis did not exactly go big time on either aero or weight reduction and it has pretty big wheels as standard and even bigger as options ?

 

45 kWh battery is better than many but not class leading against 62 kWh LEAF or MG 5 long range.

 

To me amazing the car manufacturers have not built to date an aero or light bodies ie Ally like the Audi A2 was, to get that extra dozen or two dozen miles extra.  

 

I like the ZE 50 Zoe but would lover to trade in for the 60 kWh Megane when it is released, even though UK not getting the 12 inch screen only the 9 inch screen and its range should be 280 WLTP or in the range of 200 winter and 250 summer I reckon ie better than the 170/225 miles the Zoe is and that is not only the slightly bigger battery but that it is less tall than the Zoe which has more of a city car shape. 

 

Regen is so important and with the Zoe that only fully kicks in under 90% SOC. Hills too of course and starting from the Severn Valley floor and then usually going up to the Birmingham plateau or Cotswold escarpment makes the consumption look bad in the initial ten or 20 miles, oh to live higher up.

 

Want to get a Bluetti A300 and a couple of B300 batteries and I will be set fair in the car and house and when next Winter's rolling black out come around.

[Ootohere]

@lol-lolShe nails it on the head.  I see that there are those that advertise the Stellantis cars as having 45kW batteries which is what they should have done from the start since only the Usable actually matters, and 3 x 45 is 135,  and 3 times 50 is 150 obviously. 

4.6 miles x 45 kW is 207 miles and not going to happen.  Well not very often with people, luggage, weather and going places.  Regardless of a heat pump.

 

 

 

 

[EnterName]

On 16/05/2022 at 09:42, roottoot said:

Saving money on fuel is a lifestyle thing and can be a bit of an effort.

This is the biggest inhibitor for an EV for me, but I'm also concerned with security and safety when charging.

Petrol stations almost always have staff present as well as good CCTV, which inhibits crime.

I'm not sure the same applies with all charging stations. That bothers me a little, though to be fair, I suspect most of my charging would be overnight at home.

[wyx087]

On 01/06/2022 at 19:19, EnterName said:

This is the biggest inhibitor for an EV for me, but I'm also concerned with security and safety when charging.

Petrol stations almost always have staff present as well as good CCTV, which inhibits crime.

I'm not sure the same applies with all charging stations. That bothers me a little, though to be fair, I suspect most of my charging would be overnight at home.

Totally agree, for some unknown reason, people (mainly Chargemaster/Polar/Pulse (same company)) seems to think plunk down a rapid charger middle of nowhere is okay.

 

Mid-journey rapid charger hubs really need to be built like petrol stations, for example: Gridserve forecourt https://www.gridserve.com/2020/12/06/gridserve-opens-uks-first-electric-forecourt/

 

For slow charging, it'll be same as regular car park, I don't see any need for worry. Dwell time at those locations will be minimum, very little difference to currently.

[Lady Elanore]

This opened my eyes a little further. EVs appear to be worse than I thought at contributing to global warming! Assuming this is all true, of course.

 

We should all be buying V8s is what I took from this TED talk. Oh and that hybrids are probably the best current solution! 

 

 

Edited 4 June, 2022 by Lady Elanore

[Ootohere]

As soon as it is $$$$$'s mentioned then you know they are burning coal. and oil and gas and getting oil & gas and coal out and not giving a damn about the environment.

If they are worried about where the oil and gas is elsewhere in the world then just fund killing people and claiming their resources or sell weapons to dictators to ensure they do the killing.

[Lady Elanore]

It's from 7 minutes (roughly) that I found most interesting. I knew EVs produced a lot of CO2 in the manufacture of their batteries, but this chap is suggesting it's a huge amount more than most people realise. The irony of his words, is that the potential 'right solution' for these current times are quite possibly PHEVs, which is exactly the latest vehicle type to come under scrutiny and seems to no longer be considered in a favourable way by many governments. It certainly makes you think that Porsches synthetic fuels should have a future and not be automatically dismissed, as seems to have happened. Also, Hydrogen ICE cars should maybe given more consideration. But I think the TED talker is correct in that people in power have decided that the easy fix is EV and they don't necessarily want to look at the larger box as was demonstrated. 

[Lady Elanore]

BTW I'm not totally against EVs and I rather like PHEVs  :) 

[Ootohere]

The Green Hydrogen is coming on and the USA wants the Ammonia to be the big thing.

Renewable electricity is easy, and storing it is not, so producing the synthetic fuels and energy sources to store is coming in the biggest way.

The smart people have their money in it now.

They have the investments now in the North East of Scotland.

http://group.vattenfall.com/uk/newsroom/pressreleases/2022/aberdeen-hydrogen

 

But 'they' (the wealthiest)  still have more money invested in  Fresh Water as that is what the world will be short off, it needs lots of energy to produce. 

 

Some places just have lots of resources and some need to bring it from far away. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 4 June, 2022 by roottoot

[lol-lol]

1 hour ago, Lady Elanore said:

This opened my eyes a little further. EVs appear to be worse than I thought at contributing to global warming! Assuming this is all true, of course.

 

We should all be buying V8s is what I took from this TED talk. Oh and that hybrids are probably the best current solution! 

 

 

 

He is right that we must look at "System Boundaries", the proper name for is box analogy, and the most important system boundary is the one of the Earth's atmosphere, and that CO2 figure continues to rise......

Lithium requires about 60 kWh of energy to produce every kilogram of Lithium, all in, so with such figures in mind I suppose we to calculate how many kilometres /miles we need to use to drive our EVs to break even in the CO2 stakes.

 

Company I work for make solid state LIthium batteries (LMP type) and we are also one of the world's largest logistics companies and we and many of our clients are prioiritising CO2 and sustainability.  EVs, and I mean trucks, vans, cars and motorcycle run on electricity from renewables or nuclear and the need to stop using coal, then Hydro-carbon oil then HC gas is a world wide push.  Europe well down the road to achieving zero CO2 for power production with America and Asia paced redoubled this year with the price rise in oil and gas, unless you are China and get a third off Russian oil price as mates rates.    

If the LIthium refining and car manufacturing is carbon free we have a glorious rounded process of being powered by sunshine and wind, and the power of fission for those dark and windless times.       

 

 

[Lady Elanore]

The important thing to take from that TED talk is we should really all be driving V8s

 

 

Edited 4 June, 2022 by Lady Elanore

[Ootohere]

I had 600 miles worth of free charging yesterday and today but it was a fiasco at 6 am this morning and not that much fun yesterday with Charger Wars and the hopelessness of Charge Place Scotland and some local authorities.

 

I met 3 company drivers that are now going back to diesels as they are peed off with the carry on of charging.

One driver of a £95,000 EV Merc that has to do lots of miles is going back to a ICE Jag and does not care about the fuel expense or BIK but acually getting places.

The Merc only charges at 100 kW max and is not efficient.

 

.........................

5,000 miles has disappeared off what my car thinks it has done, but in total with this car and other evs i have done over 35,000 miles for less than £100 paid for electricity and 2 x CPS cards.

Edited 4 June, 2022 by roottoot

[lol-lol]

1 hour ago, Lady Elanore said:

The important thing to take from that TED talk is we should really all be driving V8s

 

 

 

As long as the fuel has no carbon, ie it is converted to run on hydrogen or hydrogen dirivative that is fine.

 

Every gram of carbon burnt moves us closer to the apocalypse, maybe not our lifetime but for those that follow. 

 

[wyx087]

1 hour ago, Lady Elanore said:

It's from 7 minutes (roughly) that I found most interesting. I knew EVs produced a lot of CO2 in the manufacture of their batteries, but this chap is suggesting it's a huge amount more than most people realise. The irony of his words, is that the potential 'right solution' for these current times are quite possibly PHEVs, which is exactly the latest vehicle type to come under scrutiny and seems to no longer be considered in a favourable way by many governments. It certainly makes you think that Porsches synthetic fuels should have a future and not be automatically dismissed, as seems to have happened. Also, Hydrogen ICE cars should maybe given more consideration. But I think the TED talker is correct in that people in power have decided that the easy fix is EV and they don't necessarily want to look at the larger box as was demonstrated. 

 

Too long, won't read version: Totally false graph made up to promote his narrative.

 

Tesla Model 3 has around 300 miles of range. "The manufacturing process of a Model 3 currently results in slightly higher GHG emissions than an equivalent combustion engine vehicle. However, based on the global weighted average grid mix, a Model 3 has lower lifetime emissions than an equivalent ICE after driving 5,340 miles." https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/2020-tesla-impact-report.pdf

Based on that graph, 400 miles EV manufacturing is equivalent to around after 120k miles. How is there such a HUGE difference between the data?

 

That is because the EV 400 miles starting point is calculated based on extrapolation from 125 miles range EV (looks like 13t for shorter range EV - 5t for conventional = 8t difference, multiply by (400/125=) 3.2 distance factor to get 25.6t). But the truth is that the 125 miles range EV data is also false or based on very outdated data.

This article (a very quick google for "battery electric vehicle lifetime emission cumulative graph", no biased wording) claims 6t for conventional ICE car and 10t for a "new Nissan Leaf in 2019", I'd take that was the ~150 miles 40 kWh variant. Somehow, this graph is now showing EV emits less lifetime-CO2 after just 2 years.

https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/electric-cars-vehicles-transport-emissions-carbon-footprint-public-transportation/132958/

 

 

One has to remember there is a HUGE amount of variation for manufacturing data. For example, Volvo paper https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/media/market-assets/intl/applications/dotcom/pdf/c40/volvo-c40-recharge-lca-report.pdf

This paper presents ICE to have initial carbon footprint of ~16t, vastly different all other data we've seen.

Whilst the 400 miles EV starting value does look close to Volvo's data, but the ICE one isn't. Volvo's paper also doesn't say how are their batteries for the EV are sourced, whether it is made in factory powered by renewables, etc. (we know Tesla uses renewables to power their factories).

 

And that's only analysing the manufacturing emissions, starting points on the graph. A quick glance at lifetime emission near the end, we also see massive differences between all sources, including the fossil fuel one, which you'd think should be very similar.

 

 

 

So considering the whole argument from the TED talk presenter is based on that single graph, but gave no references to sources and thus it is probably fabricated to fit his narrative. I would not trust anything coming out of this man.

 

That is, ignoring the elephant in the room, following along with 400 miles EV narrative. We don't need equivalent range for batteries-on-wheels that we could be recharge whenever it is parked, over 80% of a regular car's lifetime is parked up.

 

 

5 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

As long as the fuel has no carbon, ie it is converted to run on hydrogen or hydrogen dirivative that is fine.

MUST BE green hydrogen. All other "colours" are completely pointless.

[Lady Elanore]

I want my V8 to run on petrol.

[Ootohere]

There are plenty v8's to go around and nobody is stopping others from running them or buy the petrol.

Running them on LPG makes lots of sense and plenty people do that. 

[KenONeill]

15 minutes ago, Lady Elanore said:

I want my V8 to run on petrol.

And to have a dual plane crankshaft.

[wyx087]

22 minutes ago, Lady Elanore said:

I want my V8 to run on petrol.

You might be in the wrong forum subsection 😛

[Lady Elanore]

I will run a PHEV for work though. I've badgered a colleague who has a history of daft cars, previously he owned a beautiful RS4, to bring his wife's car on a job, so I can have a decent ride in it. It's a Mustang E, apparently. Athough according to the above TED lecture, she might have bought the wrong car  

[Ootohere]

If she has bought the wrong car she can probably get rid of it easily without losing money and buy something else that dealers are sitting with that are not that much in demand due to fuel prices.

 

 

 

Edited 5 June, 2022 by roottoot

[Lady Elanore]

I assume buying new EVs is as tough as buying ICE cars at the moment. Availability is awful, unless you want to buy higher end models that manufacturers are understandably prioritising. ICE models are still in demand and in my industry, very few people have gone over to the 'blue side', mainly because of range anxiety and the hours we work stopping them from searching around for stations that are either nearby, available or actually work. I will be hanging on to my enthusiasts ICE cars as long as I can realistically afford to run them and hope that and alternative to pure BEV comes along before I am forced to buy one. Having said that, I was not joking about a PHEV for my work car.

[Ootohere]

@Lady Elanore Manufacturers of cars for the EU & UK are having to prioritise EV's and Electrified ICE vehicles because they have to meet the Average Co2 Emissions.  They have to control how many higher emission cars are delivered and First Registered.

They are partnering and trying every trick in the book to make sure they are not penalised for not meeting the required average emissions.

The difficulty is the Battery shortages, chips, looms etc and the materials required to build batteries so using the materials to have Hybrid Batteries are badly affecting the numbers they can get first registered.

http://cnbc.com/2022/05/24/stellantis-ceo-warns-of-ev-battery-shortage-lack-of-raw-materials.html

 

Edited 5 June, 2022 by roottoot

[Lady Elanore]

Interestingly, BMW are selling so many EVs and PHEVs, they don't have to put any limit on the numbers of carl like the M3/M4/M5/M6/X3M/X4M/X5M that they make. Their average emissions are sufficiently low, they can build silly ICE cars with relative impunity. This will change however, as PHEVs are about to have a reclassified CO2 rating which will be much less positive (although no mention of the CO2 produced in the giant 100kWh+ batteries in their latest behemoth)