• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Zero-emission vehicles, their batteries & subsidies/rebates for them.- No politics regarding the subsidies!

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
1,210
Likes
5,205
Location
NorCal

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,145
Location
USA
So what part of them is still not frictionless? We have brushless motors now, so that part is solved.
A pretty good and high level general discussion of electric motor losses:


Electric motors benefit from the same gearing torque multiplication as do IC engines, so a gear ratio allows you to use a smaller motor to get the same acceleration. The losses increase as the rotational speed increases.
 

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
1,210
Likes
5,205
Location
NorCal
A pretty good and high level general discussion of electric motor losses:


Electric motors benefit from the same gearing torque multiplication as do IC engines, so a gear ratio allows you to use a smaller motor to get the same acceleration. The losses increase as the rotational speed increases.
Hey thanks for this. I'm a ME and love this stuff. That dude in the video needs a chill pill. :D

But to your earlier point its early in the game and mechanical transmissions have losses too. So the answer my come from new types of motors. Here is another video about how Tesla is solving the same issue.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
16,444
Likes
28,337
A pretty good and high level general discussion of electric motor losses:


Electric motors benefit from the same gearing torque multiplication as do IC engines, so a gear ratio allows you to use a smaller motor to get the same acceleration. The losses increase as the rotational speed increases.
I remember reading discussions of this on forums for diy electric bikes. There were some very small surprisingly powerful motors of low weight that spun at very high RPM. Finding the sweet spot was all about not spinning too fast and incurring efficiency loss.
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,145
Location
USA
Hey thanks for this. I'm a ME and love this stuff. That dude in the video needs a chill pill. :D

But to your earlier point its early in the game and mechanical transmissions have losses too. So the answer my come from new types of motors. Here is another video about how Tesla is solving the same issue.
Cool. Now I know who to ask my ME questions.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
1,972
Likes
2,290
I remember reading discussions of this on forums for diy electric bikes. There were some very small surprisingly powerful motors of low weight that spun at very high RPM. Finding the sweet spot was all about not spinning too fast and incurring efficiency loss.
Electric model-aeroplane motors.
 
Last edited:

pablolie

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 8, 2021
Messages
627
Likes
968
Location
bay area, ca
So do you have a level 2 charging setup where you store the Leaf? Are there no fast charging areas if you wanted to use it for some days in the wine country?
Yes we installed a good charging station in her garage.

As to the wine country, charging spots are hotly contested when there, so despite the fact it's a very popular destination I'd declare it a pretty bleak coverage spot, as there are still many.
 

Jimster480

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
2,271
Likes
1,566
Location
Tampa Bay
This is not the case in electric cars. Electric cars don’t require multi-speed transmissions because of the so-called “engine” in an electric car, an electric motor. While internal combustion engines require multiple gears with different ratios for power output, electric motors produce a consistent amount of torque at any given RPM within a specific range. Electric motors deliver power instantly, meaning, the process of building up torque through revving as in internal combustion engines is unnecessary. Car manufacturers incorporate carefully calculated gear ratios to maximize efficiency for the electric motor without having to switch through gears. NO TRANSMISSION on EV. Batteries are warranted
That doesn't matter, warranties don't last forever. Parts cannot be replaced in the same manner, and electric motors are also more expensive and likely will remain that way for at least another decade, if not longer. Especially as some cars are built with literal DRM to prevent you from swapping parts even if you want to.
That is the fundalmental difference. Also just like in your gas car; the alternator & starter both wear out. Electric motors wear out far faster than gas ones do. So you WILL NEED to change your motors likely sooner than any modern gas vehicles. This is very apparent in the higher performance Tesla's which often struggle to reach 100k miles on their original motors.
Additionally they are already building EV's with transmissions and in time I'm sure they will all have transmissions because they just make more sense.
The first line of the article makes the point. In development by company who cars cost between $70K-$200k.
All development trickles down to the bottom eventually. Just look at audio equipment on this forum today.
Yeah, if the analysis is correct it makes the point that most EVs are lacking a range-enhancing technology. Since electric motors are not frictionless, running them slower increases efficiency.
Typically anything benefits from spinning slower when it comes to friction.
So what part of them is still not frictionless? We have brushless motors now, so that part is solved.
Brushless motors don't have 0 friction. Also the shaft and attached pieces of said shaft will also have friction. I doubt we will see Maglev driveshafts and axles any time in the near future (if ever).
I think most of us here are EV proponents if not adopters. I was was just pointing out that almost all current EVs have no transmissions. Also, Federal law requires automakers to ensure EV and hybrid batteries for at least eight years or 100,000 miles and California 150,000 miles. How long will it take for the two speed transmission to trickle down to Porsche's sister company Volkswagen EVs as a standard component, 3yrs?, 5yrs?
Federal Laws do very little in any aspect. Car companies won't follow them just like they don't follow them now. With so many EV's having trouble past 50k miles.... what happens? Nothing. There are just fines or people have to go to court and then have "their expenses all paid". This isn't dissimilar to gas vehicles either. There have been plenty of recent models from big brands (even ones like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Chevy) that have had models with major failures (Transmissions, Engines, Electronics) in sub 100k Miles. So purchasing an EV doesn't give you anything special in this regard. The only difference is that you definitely cannot fix it yourself (unless it is a Leaf, depending on what is wrong).
I do have a Nissan Leaf as a city car. I keep it parked at my girlfriend's, since she decided to live car-less and I actually ride one of my motorcycles day to say, and have a fun gas-powered car also. I'll be quite honest - I also left it at my GF's because I find the practicality of EVs questionable. When I need a car, it's typically for hauling duties or for long distance drives - say spend a day in the wine country around here, or dash down to LA. Can't do that with an EV. The Leaf doesn't have the necessary range with the 210 mile spec, and the charging takes too long. It's OK for local duties and 70 mile weekend dashes. But the limitations often make me think that, at the times it is ideal for duty, I might as well just Uber around.

Also, because they are extremely un-entertaining to drive. I do have friends with the top Tesla S - and yes the acceleration is exhilarating, but the overall dynamic behavior if you take it to a twisty road is very so-so. The Leaf isn't a bargain for what it really is -I think the bill was $40k-ish- but the top level Tesla S IMO is way too much money for way too little entertainment. If I was forced to spend that much, I'd favor a Porsche 911 every time. :)

In a nutshell I think I wasted $ buying a Nissan Leaf. But the GF loves it for the rare occasions she needs a car, and it also means I can ride a motorcycle to her place (she refuses to sit on a motorcycle) and we can leave go somewhere else in the car (unless she forgot to charge it, half the time she waits for me to be there).

PS:The Leaf also has a so-so audio system.
I totally agree on the sports aspect. As a car enthusiast myself; EV's are not very sporty. I rode in someones P100D a few times and despite the straight line acceleration; there is nothing special about it. It doesn't handle that well, likely because it is too heavy. Also without any transmission, it really doesn't drive like any normal sporty car would. Also the overall range is greatly depleted if you choose to go fast with it. This guy who gave all of us rides in his P100D lost 15% battery in 25 minutes just doing some 0-60 test hits and then another 20% battery in about 45 more minutes doing some highway pulls and stuff. Probably drove a total of 30 miles and lost 35% battery...
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,258
Likes
3,205
Brushless motors don't have 0 friction. Also the shaft and attached pieces of said shaft will also have friction. I doubt we will see Maglev driveshafts and axles any time in the near future (if ever).
I know about the output shaft. I was referring to just the motor itself and not the whole drivetrain. Obviously that isn't physically possible as there's always loss in transmission and gear ratios, and we're still coupling to the ground.
 

JeffS7444

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 21, 2019
Messages
1,970
Likes
2,882
Not specifically about automobiles so much as a message that climate doom is not necessarily inevitable:
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
16,444
Likes
28,337
Not specifically about automobiles so much as a message that climate doom is not necessarily inevitable:
I'm not pro global warming or anything. But notable that this is a cartoon. Like something from a fantasy you know. Or a child's fable.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,258
Likes
3,205
Kurzgesagt is a great channel and I always admire how much work (research, writing, animation) goes into his videos. If only I had the talent for animation.

I like the positive message, one essentially of "bending the curve" with technology, and debunking the notion that transitioning to renewable energy would make us poor. Still, the situation is incredibly dire at 3°C of heating. Remember, that is a global average surface temperature, and the distribution of warming on a planet with more CO2 is not even. The north and south poles will see the majority of that, perhaps +10°C over preindustrial levels. This is enough to raise sea levels substantially higher. Taking a look at the projections from Climate Central for the year 2100:
  • Much of Louisiana south of Baton Rouge will be gone. What's left above water will see regular epic flooding, including New Orleans. Katrina was merely a rehearsal.
  • The Houston shoreline will move back by tens of miles.
  • The Florida Everglades will be gone.
  • Most of the islands surrounding Florida, including The Bahamas, will be uninhabitable.
  • Half of Oakland International Airport will be underwater.
  • A swath of London along the River Thames will be underwater, and Peterborough will be oceanfront property.
  • Netherlands stands to lose an incredible amount of land.
  • The city of Vancouver, BC will lose what looks like half its area.
  • The Vietnam delta south of Saigon will be uninhabitable.
  • The new VinFast EV factory in Haiphong will be flooded.
  • All of the inhabitants surrounding Bangkok, Thailand will be underwater.
  • Most of Napier, NZ will be under the tide line.
  • Most of Whakatāne, NZ farmland will be flooded.
  • The Sydney Airport will lose its two longest runways.
  • Of course the famous Great Barrier Reef will have been long dead.
  • A large area encompassing Saga, Japan and several other towns will be lost to the Ariake Sea.
  • A large chunk of Nagoya, Japan will be lost to the Ise Bay.
  • Quite a bit of Osaka Bay will flood Osaka along the Yodo River.
  • Half of Kushiro, Japan will be lost to the ocean.

If we're at all smart about this as a species, by the end of the century we will have learned that we can control the temperature of our planet. We will find an optimal level of CO2 and target our emissions to keep us within a range of the ideal. My bet is that is a return to post-ice age, preindustrial levels, perhaps 200-250ppm – the levels at which life on Earth had adapted to and thrived. Another factor driving this desire will be how scarce undeveloped land will be. Sea levels must be lowered to uncover more land. That will require net negative emissions for the the next couple of hundred years (where carbon sinks such as forests take up more than we are emitting).
 
Last edited:

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,271
Likes
2,358
Location
Southern California
This past week, certain parts of China have limited electrical usage and specifically, the use of EV charging stations
https://jalopnik.com/china-shuts-down-ev-charging-stations-to-conserve-power-1849453761
Ironically, the area in question is near a hydro-electric dam that water levels have been very low (hello Hoover Dam!) which has led to significantly less power generated.

This is clearly a harbinger of things to come for California which will ban the sales of ICE cars by 2035. It appears that the USA better start pushing for solar and battery storage subsidies for individuals so that homes can independently generate their own power to offset these power shortages. Maybe I'll hold onto my ICE minivan a little longer!
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,145
Location
USA
This is clearly a harbinger of things to come for California which will ban the sales of ICE cars by 2035. It appears that the USA better start pushing for solar and battery storage subsidies for individuals so that homes can independently generate their own power to offset these power shortages. Maybe I'll hold onto my ICE minivan a little longer!
California's decision to ban ICE cars by 2035 has got to be one of the most short-sighted decisions I've ever seen, and this is not a political statement, it is simple math and economics. Already oil refiners are under-investing in gasoline and diesel refinery capacity because US gasoline consumption is projected to peak soon:


California, with its unique refining requirements, will likely be the tip of the spear with regards to rising ICE fuel prices over the next several years.

I find Reuters to be less-biased than most news sources, and this recent article quotes AlixPartners as projecting that by 2035 only 54% of global vehicle sales will be EVs.


Of course, even this projection assumes that the lithium and rare earth sourcing problems are solved long before then, and maybe they could be. I understand, for example, the Salton Sea in California is being considered for lithium mining:


But any domestic mining will likely face stiff pushback and regulation proposals from the environmental lobbying groups, so I'm doubtful that domestic lithium sources, especially in California, could come online fast enough to support such a massive increase in battery production. And EVs are being pushed worldwide, so the supply chain pressure is worldwide, and, as everyone knows, the current leading sources for everything in EV batteries are in China, which we have an increasingly bumpy trade relationship with.

The problem is, total new vehicle sales in California alone plateaued in normal times at about 2.2 million units per year in 2019, and perhaps 10% of them are currently EVs.

Cal-Covering-4Q-20.pdf

Current EV sales for the entire US is headed towards, maybe, one million vehicles per year in 2022:


Total US new car sales were over 17 million units per years in 2019, probably the last "normal" model year, as in normal supply chains:

car-sales-stats

The math for battery availability and EV vehicle production volumes doesn't seem to work to support California being able to stop ICE vehicle sales by 2035. California current new car sales exceed the entire US EV sales. 13 years is not an especially long time in the development of new vehicles and EV supply lines to satisfy California's requirements. This isn't anything like the emissions controls or safety regulations changes in the 1960s and 1970s that impacted the auto industry, the EV transition is a lot more costly and difficult.

Even if you keep your ICE vehicle by maintaining it well, the price you'll pay for gasoline and diesel fuels will certainly increase dramatically, because the refining companies will slow investing years prior to 2035. And who'll suffer most? Well, of course, people below the 80th percentile of income level, who will have trouble buying high-demand EVs and will suffer from high gasoline prices.

The math for 2035 looks like the current target is very optimistic for stopping the sales of ICE vehicles.
 
Last edited:

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,258
Likes
3,205
Even if you keep your ICE vehicle by maintaining it well, the price you'll pay for gasoline and diesel fuels will certainly increase dramatically, because the refining companies will slow investing years prior to 2035. And who'll suffer most? Well, of course, people below the 80th percentile of income level, who will have trouble buying high-demand EVs and will suffer from high gasoline prices.
No one said it would be easy: this is a major shift. However, there are some catalysts, such as the EV credit, which doesn't apply if any of the battery parts are made in China, so there is an incentive for industry participants to make changes in order to tap into the money waiting for them. That increases demand for charging solutions, which increases desirability of EV's, and suddenly you have a feedback loop.

The U.S. just hopped on the S-curve of adoption, hitting 5% EV this year, so we'll see. New technology tends to start an exponential rise in adoption beyond that point as the general public follows the early adopters.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
16,444
Likes
28,337
No one said it would be easy: this is a major shift. However, there are some catalysts, such as the EV credit, which doesn't apply if any of the battery parts are made in China, so there is an incentive for industry participants to make changes in order to tap into the money waiting for them. That increases demand for charging solutions, which increases desirability of EV's, and suddenly you have a feedback loop.

The U.S. just hopped on the S-curve of adoption, hitting 5% EV this year, so we'll see. New technology tends to start an exponential rise in adoption beyond that point as the general public follows the early adopters.
If what you say is true about the S-curve, and feedback loops, then the problem will take care of itself. No need for a ban of anything. The forced changes usually cause distortion and inefficiency in markets unless they are instrumental in developing them. A simple ban doesn't develop anything. Already any EV you wish to buy has a months long waiting list. So they are being brought on-board as fast as is possible. Much like the recent subsidies it really doesn't help improve rates of EV sales when there is already a huge backlog in orders and several companies are already investing billions to get production going faster.
 

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
1,210
Likes
5,205
Location
NorCal
13 years is not an especially long time in the development of new vehicles and EV supply lines to satisfy California's requirements.
Yeah luckily it started 20 years ago so a third of century will probably be okay. The Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997. Many EVs are out now in spite of shortages. $6/gal gas and Zoom is also helping the cause.
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,145
Location
USA
Yeah luckily it started 20 years ago so a third of century will probably be okay. The Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997. Many EVs are out now in spite of shortages. $6/gal gas and Zoom is also helping the cause.
Whatever happened 20 years ago is irrelevant. It only matters where we are now on the deployment curve and how fast progress can be made. I’m simply of the opinion that progress in the next 13 years is likely to fall short.

BTW, the General Motors EV1 was an all electric car made from 1996-1999. Look it up. The Prius is/was a hybrid and irrelevant to the EV issue.
 
Top Bottom