|
Fill up an ICE in 5 minutes and drive 500 miles.
"Fill up" an EV - 500 miles will take 2 or 3 charging sessions with aggregate charging time of between an hour (fast charging) and ~24 hours on a domestic 7KW charger.
Fuel for an ICE at (say) 40mpg is 12.5 gallons = £90
Charging an EV at (say) 4 miles per kw requires 125kw. At home on overnight off peak rates of (say) 5p kwh = £6. At full rates of (say) 40p the cost would be £50.
EV gets the benefit of low cost "fuel" for every mile driven, but is an inconvenience only when doing longer journeys.
The converse is true of ICE - pay through the nose for every mile driven secure in the knowledge that a 500 mile trip can be taken without any pre-planning of fuel stops.
The obsession with re-fuelling times is probably to focus on the single remaining material superiority of ICE over EV, which is otherwise better in most/all other respects - running costs, environmental, noise, lower maintenance costs, etc.
We all accept that for those driving a 1000 miles a week with no home offroad charging facilities an EV would not be the logical choice.
For those driving more normal distances the only real barrier to EV ownership is the cost of purchase. The cost of a new or nearly new car (ICE or EV) is beyond the pockets of many, not unique to EV.
|
|
|
Some of the newer (more expensive) 800v cars are looking at 10-80% charge in 18 minutes when on a 350kW charger. There aren’t many of those cars or chargers around at the moment ....
I have misgivings about any moderate-scale installation handling one-third of a megawatt. That will need very heavy cabling or some cooling arrangement to dissipate heat, as I doubt anything will be superconducting ? Especially as we are worrying about vehicle fires ....
|
|
Worrying about EV fires?
But not about splashing a dozen gallons of unleaded into your tank. Arguably more dangerous especially if you're an inveterate smoker..or a Russian careless smoker. Fuel lines leak, old cars smell of petrol inside due to steel tanks rusting holes.
Yet you casually ignore such obvious risks because of familiarity. In a few years you may easily be as familiar with EV charging. I certainly am. Its been carefully designed and is safe. You would have to be plugging your car in practically underwater before it'd be a problem. Familiarity and risk.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 12/10/2023 at 00:02
|
|
In a few years you may easily be as familiar with EV charging. I certainly am. Its been carefully designed and is safe
Petrol doesn`t burn until the air/oxygen ratio is right, where an electric cable with an invisible crack in the insulation could give a large shock, and as the power in cables is a fair amount you can earth anywhere on the body, so although the petrol is leaking from a fuel line doesn`t mean it will blow up, like an old HT cable- if your hand is close to the insulation crack you will get a shock
|
The obsession with re-fuelling times is probably to focus on the single remaining material superiority of ICE over EV, which is otherwise better in most/all other respects - running costs, environmental, noise, lower maintenance costs, etc.
The re-fuelling time thing is not a trivial matter though. This inconvenience leads to a household having to keep either an ICE as sole car or EV as 2nd car.
I think instead of expensive cars with longer ranges, manufacturers should focus on EVs with shorter ranges and lower purchase cost.
Government should create a separate driving category for Citroen Ami type cars so that new drivers are encouraged to buys EVs and restrict usage under 30 MPH and around towns only.
This will encourage lot of youngsters who otherwise shuns driving due to heavy investment. Those graduating in these type of cars can later upgarde to full license.
|
I think instead of expensive cars with longer ranges, manufacturers should focus on EVs with shorter ranges and lower purchase cost.
Don't agree. Manufacturers should be prevented (legally if necessary) from selling cars with stupidly powerful motors and ludicrous 0 - 60 times (only useful for willy waving in the local) and instead make cars with sensible power outputs and performance (Superb iV with 218 PS and a 0 - 60 of about 7.5 seconds is quicker than I will ever need) and a longer range battery for little more £££'s than a similar ICE car.
Only yesterday was browsing at Tesco and saw a test of the revised Polestar 2 and Tesla 3. Polestar was marked down because its 0 - 60 was slow 6.? seconds whereas the Tesla was a much better car since it would do 0 - 60 in 4.? seconds.
Lets think for a moment, what do we want? range or unusable performance?
|
|
It seems crazy - not that long ago 0-60 in under ten secs was considered a hot hatch.
|
|
|
‘ Don't agree. Manufacturers should be prevented (legally if necessary) from selling cars with stupidly powerful motors and ludicrous 0 - 60 times (only useful for willy waving in the local) and instead make cars with sensible power outputs and performance (Superb iV with 218 PS and a 0 - 60 of about 7.5 seconds is quicker than I will ever need) and a longer range battery for little more £££'s than a similar ICE car.
Only yesterday was browsing at Tesco and saw a test of the revised Polestar 2 and Tesla 3. Polestar was marked down because its 0 - 60 was slow 6.? seconds whereas the Tesla was a much better car since it would do 0 - 60 in 4.? seconds.
Lets think for a moment, what do we want? range or unusable performance?’
Or the option to do both, but obviously not at the same time?
Polestar 2 Single Motor is 0-60 in 5.9 but will do 350 miles without stopping, if driven more appropriately. That’s all the range anyone needs without a stop.
How quick is the Caterham, by the way?
|
|
Or the option to do both, but obviously not at the same time?
Polestar 2 Single Motor is 0-60 in 5.9 but will do 350 miles without stopping, if driven more appropriately. That’s all the range anyone needs without a stop.
I think you will find controlling an EV motor is harder than controlling an ICE as the Motor/s needs software and hardware to control both speed and power from standstill to max rpm, which I suspect would cost more
|
range or unusable performance?’
I think due to inherent characteristics of electric motor, powerful enough to haul a heavy car, performance comes for free. It may be more costly to suppress their performance.
|
|
|
I think you will find controlling an EV motor is harder than controlling an ICE as the Motor/s needs software and hardware to control both speed and power from standstill to max rpm, which I suspect would cost more
The software and hardware to control an ICE is at least as complex.
That required to coordinate traction control, suspension settings, ABS etc are probably similar in both.
ICE has far more complex engineering with more moving and rotating parts, a profusion of sensor data to ingest and control (temperature, oxygen, air flow, fuel pressure etc). Additionally with an auto gearbox, gear changes need to be coordinated with engine management.
By comparison controlling power to an EV is almost trivial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a few years you may easily be as familiar with EV charging. I certainly am. Its been carefully designed and is safe
Petrol doesn`t burn until the air/oxygen ratio is right, where an electric cable with an invisible crack in the insulation could give a large shock, and as the power in cables is a fair amount you can earth anywhere on the body, so although the petrol is leaking from a fuel line doesn`t mean it will blow up, like an old HT cable- if your hand is close to the insulation crack you will get a shock
Yet you don't worry about all those electrical cables in your house and outside.
|
|
<< Yet you don't worry about all those electrical cables in your house and outside.
If you are talking about home charging, that is probably fine. Public charging points for EVs are a fairly new phenomenon though, and it seems some cabling may be carrying 30 times the current needed for an electric cooker.
|
|
A current of 0.1 amos will probably kill.
In a domestic setting an electric shower may draw 20-30 amps, a hair dryer 5-10 amps, etc. Fatal shocks are rare due to product design and use of RCDs in consumer units which protect against currents in milliamps and with a speed in milliseconds.
It seems unlikely that a device capable of delivering far in excess of anything a domestic appliance could do would be designed with any other than duplicated or triple safety systems.
|
It seems unlikely that a device capable of delivering far in excess of anything a domestic appliance could do would be designed with any other than duplicated or triple safety systems.
I wasn't concerned about immediate hazard to users as I am sure that would be designed out, just the amount of heat generated in any cable carrying that kind of load, unless it is superconducting. What will be the cross-section, as cable to a 9kw power shower has to be 2.5 mm2 IIRC ?
|
I’ve no idea of the cross section, but it’s larger than a shower feed by a magnitude of lots.
I do know it can be a two handed operation to wrangle a DC cable and CCS plug if it’s in an awkward location on the car.
The cables, incidentally, on the higher powered charger are liquid (glycol?) cooled.
Think of the outer diameter being similar, or slightly greater than, a fuel hose at a petrol station.
Edited by mcb100 on 13/10/2023 at 14:49
|
Passing a 350kW rapid charger, so here’s the CCS plug and cable (with hand for scale) in its dock on the charger.
1drv.ms/i/s!AuMkRafLnOYXg6YKjQBlgRQHuHlqeg
|
Passing a 350kW rapid charger, so here’s the CCS plug and cable (with hand for scale) in its dock on the charger.
Interesting shot, MCB. The cross-section seems to narrow down slightly passing through the grip, but pretty fat. Assuming it retracts like a fuel pump when stabled, there has to be some flexibility, which means lots of fine wires, rope fashion, plus the cooling you mention. Not that easy to handle I would guess ?
|
No, they’re fixed, but long enough to get to every car I’ve ever plugged in.
The other day was a bit of a faff in that the charge port on the car was in the nose, and because of the charger location I had to bay park forwards, towards a low wall.
So I had to go far enough in so as not to stick out of the bay, but leave enough room to get the connector and turn the cable through ninety degrees.
They’re manageable, but not with your phone or keys in your hand.
|
No, they’re fixed, but long enough to get to every car I’ve ever plugged in. The other day was a bit of a faff in that the charge port on the car was in the nose, and because of the charger location I had to bay park forwards, towards a low wall. So I had to go far enough in so as not to stick out of the bay, but leave enough room to get the connector and turn the cable through ninety degrees. They’re manageable, but not with your phone or keys in your hand.
Hmmm. With the mechanical difficulty you describe, I am wondering when the first fracture of the glycol-filled cooling system might happen. Maybe aiming for 300+kW charging is a step too far ?
|
I’m happy to rely on the research & development of companies who make these kind of things, and the relevant safety standards they have to exceed.
A ninety degree bend in the cable to plug in is fairly standard.
|
I’m happy to rely on the research & development of companies who make these kind of things, and the relevant safety standards they have to exceed. A ninety degree bend in the cable to plug in is fairly standard.
I think you have made that perfectly plain, not everyone would agree with a risk like that no matter how safe they claim it to be......
|
|
|
Worrying about EV fires?
But not about splashing a dozen gallons of unleaded into your tank. Arguably more dangerous especially if you're an inveterate smoker..or a Russian careless smoker. Fuel lines leak, old cars smell of petrol inside due to steel tanks rusting holes.
Yet you casually ignore such obvious risks because of familiarity. In a few years you may easily be as familiar with EV charging. I certainly am. Its been carefully designed and is safe. You would have to be plugging your car in practically underwater before it'd be a problem. Familiarity and risk.
I have been sloshing petrol about for getting on for 60 years.
Filling draining and working on countless motorcycles, cars, generators, outboard motors, garden equipment etc.
Some of it owned personally, a large proportion professionally.
Having learned the basics of how to handle petrol safely, I've never had a problem.
However, my apprentice did blow the top off of a lead acid battery because he forgot or refused to follow the safety advice.
Fortunately with no harm to his person.
Moral - Batteries are dangerous - petrol is safer!
|
Worrying about EV fires?
But not about splashing a dozen gallons of unleaded into your tank. Arguably more dangerous especially if you're an inveterate smoker..or a Russian careless smoker. Fuel lines leak, old cars smell of petrol inside due to steel tanks rusting holes.
Yet you casually ignore such obvious risks because of familiarity. In a few years you may easily be as familiar with EV charging. I certainly am. Its been carefully designed and is safe. You would have to be plugging your car in practically underwater before it'd be a problem. Familiarity and risk.
I have been sloshing petrol about for getting on for 60 years.
Filling draining and working on countless motorcycles, cars, generators, outboard motors, garden equipment etc.
Some of it owned personally, a large proportion professionally.
Having learned the basics of how to handle petrol safely, I've never had a problem.
However, my apprentice did blow the top off of a lead acid battery because he forgot or refused to follow the safety advice.
Fortunately with no harm to his person.
Moral - Batteries are dangerous - petrol is safer!
I agree, I have changed many a petrol tank, spent ages draining them into containers, during late 70s and 80s and never had a problem, even seen mechanics throw burning cigarettes/cigars into the fuel without it blowing up/burning.
now batteries blowing up did happen when tools were dropped by accident between the terminals, not often but did happen sometimes.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
