https://www.evgonetwork.com/Charging_Plans/ (https://www.evgonetwork.com/Charging_Plans/)
So much for those EV zealots assurances that we'd all be paying for our EV "fuel" costs with just loose couch change. Reality is a pregnant dog init it.
kinda like saying that Hybrids are greener when they actually take up a bigger carbon footprint...
reality is the downside of PR hype when it comes to automotive technology nowadays!
There are two sides to this argument.
First we are so behind on battery tech that its pointless, batteries only last a few years and then have to be "thrown out" but they have so many chemicals that disposing of them is a challenge. Unless we come up with a battery that stores large amounts of electricity and have a life of over 20 years EV vehicles are pointless.
Second if we can fix the first issue of batteries then EV vehicles do become reasonable. We can produce large volumes of electricity very efficiently such as coal and natural gas plants. Then there is Wind, geo-thermal and hydro-electro power plants that leave little to no carbon footprint.
Trust me I want to run cleaner but we need to focus more on tech before going EV. As of now having an EV is just a novelty.
-stepping off of soap box.
While I agree that battery technology needs to advance...
...the current batteries last longer than a "few years". Here's a Consumer Reports article on 2 10-year old batteries which were still functioning well (one of them very high mileage).
http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/02/200000-mile-toyota-prius-still-performs.html (http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/02/200000-mile-toyota-prius-still-performs.html)
200,000 miles is failry common apparently.
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-batteries-none-the-worse-for-wear-cga.htm (http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-batteries-none-the-worse-for-wear-cga.htm)
...second, while the power may not be as cheap as originally advertised, I'd be very happy if I could get by with putting fuel in my car for $89/month. That's pretty reasonable.
...and no, I don't own or have plans to buy an EV. However, I do recognize that we're still early in the development of electric vehicle technology, so obviously nothing is perfect and there is still a long way to go.
Lots of validity to the posts above.
I'd love to do some real-world testing of an EV here in Minnesota. In other words, leaving it sit outside during -20* periods overnight, slogging to work in the same temps plus heavy snow. Then on to 100* temps in the summer with like humidity percentages. It would be interesting to see how one would hold up.
There are a lot of Priuses ( [puke] ) around and I wonder how they fare as well, although they have the gas engine to help. (I personally don't see hybrids being The Big Thing)
Quote from: Latinbalar on September 09, 2011, 07:47:40 AM. . . We can produce large volumes of electricity very efficiently such as coal and natural gas plants. Then there is Wind, geo-thermal and hydro-electro power plants that leave little to no carbon footprint. . . .
Wind screws up wildlife habitat, hydros screw up water sources, geo's can possibly screw up water tables if not done correctly. The company I work for is involved in the latter of those three since we're good at drilling holes in the ground and evaluating what be down in them thar holes. It is safe to say that all power generation techniques have negative affects.
We'll need more power generating capacity regardless of whether thar be carbons or not. As it is now we're getting constant warnings about not flicking on our AC's at 5pm when everyone comes home from work or face rolling brownouts during the hottest days of the year. If the current power generating infrastructure can't handle that then it sure as hell can't handle 20 million plus EV's being plugged in every night. EV's are a niche market and will remain so for a looooong time.
The oft overlooked advantage to any EV or hybrid is the capability to recapture kinetic energy from the vehicle and store it for later use. With the thermal efficiency of a reciprocating motor being roughly 30% and all of the forward momentum being wasted as heat energy from the brakes on a conventional vehicle, there is a lot of energy produced that is going to waste.
I agree a pure EV vehicle is probably only viable if it can be a second car used for short trips and the like (sort of like a motorcycle) but with hybrids, you can start to use energy recovery to make use of exhaust waste, brake heat waste, engine heat waste, etc and take the thermal efficiency of the motor from 30% up to maybe 60%. Or using a Chevy Volt like approach with a micro turbine converting gas/diesel/E85/etc to electricity at 65% to 75% thermal efficiency and the everyday car can be much quieter, smoother and more efficient.
The hype is annoying, but the engineering is pretty darn cool.
Well, let's look at the numbers..
$89 for an unlimited, charge anywhere plan..
I spend about $50 to fill up my Golf TDI when diesel is about $4/gal. that takes me about 500-600 miles with mixed city/highway driving (about 60/40)
That's about 2 weeks of driving for me, so that means I fill up more than twice a month (4.3 weeks/month), which means about $115/month in fuel costs for me.
And that's in my super efficient 35 city/50 highway TDI.
$90 is a good deal for fuel costs.
And I hate electric cars, don't get me wrong. They are a bad idea until batteries become far far better.
but do the math and it's not a terrible cost.
I would kick babies into traffic for an 89 dollar a month fuel bill
+1
a Jetta TDI is $22.5k. a Nissan Leaf is $35.2k. How many years will it take for you to break even on the purchase price with $26 in fuel savings per month? How about for a $39.1k Chevy Volt? Hell, even throw in oil changes, spark plugs and other IC related maintenance costs.
One can do better in lowering their monthly fuel costs by car/vanpooling.
Quote from: Drjones on September 09, 2011, 12:22:30 PM
a Jetta TDI is $22.5k. a Nissan Leaf is $35.2k. How many years will it take for you to break even on the purchase price with $26 in fuel savings per month? How about for a $39.1k Chevy Volt? Hell, even throw in oil changes, spark plugs and other IC related maintenance costs.
One can do better in lowering their monthly fuel costs by car/vanpooling.
It's a good question. What service does the Leaf need? I have no idea.
Assuming the expenses are the same, you can look at the other plans offered -- as low as $50/month for a home plan.
Potentially, that's a $65/month advantage to my situation, assuming diesel remains at its current level of $4/gallon for me. I was in Nor Cal last week and I see people pay about $4.50/gal there.
At that difference (65/month), that's 200 months to recoup the difference.
However, there are other advantages which may be available. Hippy chicks are more likely to put out for you. Many states offer some tax benefits for buyers of electric cars, not to mention the federal tax credit.
http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/09/2012-mitsubishi-i-electric-car-has-a-price-increase-before-it-goes-on-sale.html (http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/09/2012-mitsubishi-i-electric-car-has-a-price-increase-before-it-goes-on-sale.html)
Mitsubishi i electric car: $31,125 (
$23,625 after the tax credit).
Quote from: Drjones on September 09, 2011, 12:22:30 PM
a Jetta TDI is $22.5k. a Nissan Leaf is $35.2k. How many years will it take for you to break even on the purchase price with $26 in fuel savings per month? How about for a $39.1k Chevy Volt? Hell, even throw in oil changes, spark plugs and other IC related maintenance costs.
One can do better in lowering their monthly fuel costs by car/vanpooling.
Yes, until EV vehicles get more competitive cost-wise to their IC-only counterparts, I'm not terribly interested.
I have discovered something interesting on this forum. Math doesn't work on EV problems. No matter how you compute it, 1+1 = EVs are the worst thing ever. They're just horrible no matter what.
Quote from: Drjones on September 09, 2011, 09:05:30 AM
Wind screws up wildlife habitat, hydros screw up water sources, geo's can possibly screw up water tables if not done correctly. The company I work for is involved in the latter of those three since we're good at drilling holes in the ground and evaluating what be down in them thar holes. It is safe to say that all power generation techniques have negative affects.
Yes, negative effects. The
possibility of screwing up water tables is pretty much the same as dumping millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, trillions of metric tons of carbon emissions deposited in the air yearly. The environmental impact of fracking (drilling holes in the ground to extract petroleum, leaking some of in to the ground water) is about the same as geothermal (drilling holes into the ground to extract water, leaking water into the ground water). This argument is absurd.
By this argument, I mean suggesting a false equivalence between a very slightly bad thing that shows promise of being a sight better than a really make the beast with two backsing bad thing, and that really make the beast with two backsing bad thing. They're both bad, right? Or comparing "greener" technologies to some theoretical technology that results in no environmental impact. Solar panels? TOO MUCH SHADE. Wind farms? TWIRLY NOISES. Portable nuclear fusion reactors? I DIDN'T LIKE BACK TO THE FUTURE II.
This is a fun game. For you.
Enough with the trolling.
Quote from: Drjones on September 09, 2011, 12:22:30 PM
a Jetta TDI is $22.5k. a Nissan Leaf is $35.2k. How many years will it take for you to break even on the purchase price with $26 in fuel savings per month? How about for a $39.1k Chevy Volt? Hell, even throw in oil changes, spark plugs and other IC related maintenance costs.
While you do make good points about the cost benefit of EV or hybrid vehicles (which is exactly why I still drive my 13 mpg Xterra)...
...you do realize that you're essentially the same as the "EV zealots" that you ridicule, right? You just have the opposite view as them. You refuse to see
any benefit to, and continually focus on the negatives (sometimes grasping at straws as il dood pointed out) for, alternative energy sources.
I think large numbers of humans doing anything involving large amounts of kilowatt hours of power is going to make the beast with two backs up the planet.
Solar is great, but frighteningly overpriced. It's a cute solution for folks who want to appear to be "green"
Coal make the beast with two backss up the environment before it's even burned, then we actually burn it and it gets worse.
Nuclear is awesome. Except nobody wants the waste and the factories are built by humans who cut corners
Natural gas. Not bad with a co-gen plant. Except coal is cheaper so we don't want that either.
Wind? Too ugly so the nimbys don't like it. I suppose you could put them out to sea, or something. Again, coal is "cheaper" plus wind just isn't predictable. Nor is wind going to be any more predictable what with all the man-made climate change...
Blah blah blah.
Clearly we can't fix the 'large amounts of kilowatt hours' part of this equation.
Might I offer a modest proposal to deal with the 'large numbers of humans' problem [evil] ?
Don't forget about putting solar cells in low orbit and beaming the energy down with a MASER.
Just.... don't aim it in the wrong place.
Turn off the switch
Quote from: Drunken Monkey on September 09, 2011, 08:53:04 PM
Might I offer a modest proposal to deal with the 'large numbers of humans' problem [evil] ?
Personally, I think that with the right diet, we'd be delicious.
Just sayin'.
Quote from: Jacob on September 09, 2011, 11:17:53 PM
Turn off the switch
Already there. [thumbsup]
Quote from: Drunken Monkey on September 09, 2011, 08:53:04 PM
I suppose you could put them out to sea, or something.
The generators, or the nimbys?
I don't see any reason that electric vehicles for urban use shouldn't be very common IF people want them. It would be a lot easier to set up recharging stations at various places rather than having gas stations.
But then I think about a place like New York City -- there are very few parking lots. Plenty of parking garages that charge you assrape prices (we paid $500/month to park the old Volvo) but those places park cars pell-mell and stuff them in anyway they can, so no easy way to put in charging stations (suspended from the ceiling??)
Likewise, most residents in the city who own a car park on the street wherever they can. Outer borough residents may park in a garage that is part of their building (condo/apt building) but those are not the norm. Few people drive to get groceries in NYC
On the other hand, a city like LA has a lot of FLAT parking. People drive everywhere there and there are plenty of public parking facilities -- for pay or free. Most everyone drives to get groceries, etc.
I am a big fan of having plenty of options out there as well -- there is a dealer nearby me who sells the ZENN NEV cars and a few people have picked them up for toodling around town. Seems to me that fuel distribution is a huge reason we won't see pure ethanol cars being sold (as in Brazil) alongside gas and diesel cars -- a shame, Ethanol is good for small engines in cars designed for it.
Quote from: Jacob on September 09, 2011, 11:33:00 AM
I would kick babies into traffic for an 89 dollar a month fuel bill
You'd kick babies into traffic for a Klondike bar. [evil]
A diesel at 40 mpg versus a gas hybrid at 55 mpg will take about 6 years to pay off. My numbers are as follows:
price of fuel: Diesel - $4.25 Gas $3.60
oil change: Diesel - 10,000 Gas 10,000
Cost of Engine: Diesel - $3,000 Hybrid $5,000
Miles drive: 12,000 per year
Fuel differential for Diesel is about $500 per year in increase cost.
I did not factor in the premium price for a hybrid and did not take into account any tax credit. For me, the hybrid is a terrible buy personally considering the MPG's listed are not real world conditions. I also don't live in a 10,000 square foot house and "pretend" to be green. ;D
Drunken Monkey makes a great point about coal. It's very inefficient yet those selling battery cars pretend they are doing less to harm the environment. [laugh] To each their own of course but seriously most of our energy is coal and the loss of efficiency from the conversion of coal to energy is huge.
Quote from: muskrat on September 10, 2011, 08:15:46 AM
A diesel at 40 mpg versus a gas hybrid at 55 mpg will take about 6 years to pay off. My numbers are as follows:
price of fuel: Diesel - $4.25 Gas $3.60
oil change: Diesel - 10,000 Gas 10,000
Cost of Engine: Diesel - $3,000 Hybrid $5,000
Miles drive: 12,000 per year
Fuel differential for Diesel is about $500 per year in increase cost.
Wait until they bring the diesel hybrids. I don't love the concept of a hybrid car because I prefer simplicity, at least as simple as can be done. BEV cars are simple, as are MFI diesels with some sort of catalyst.
QuoteDrunken Monkey makes a great point about coal. It's very inefficient yet those selling battery cars pretend they are doing less to harm the environment. [laugh] To each their own of course but seriously most of our energy is coal and the loss of efficiency from the conversion of coal to energy is huge.
Coal generation is about 30-35% efficient. Gas/oil generation runs about 30%. Nuclear about 2%. Of course these numbers vary, but part of the reason coal is popular is that it is cheap to procure.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 10, 2011, 09:09:49 AM
Wait until they bring the diesel hybrids. I don't love the concept of a hybrid car because I prefer simplicity, at least as simple as can be done. BEV cars are simple, as are MFI diesels with some sort of catalyst.
A diesel hybrid doesn't make much sense in a passenger car/light truck application yet.
If you take a look at a Ford or Toyota hybrid system (full hybrid) the electric motors (high torque) get the vehicle moving and then the gas engine (lower torque/higher horsepower) takes over. The electric motors provide boosts when needed, such as for passing.
A diesel is low rpm/high torque, so it's really difficult to make that work with the conventional hybrids we have today.
If you're thinking along the lines of running the diesel as a generator (as they do in a locomotive) that would be a different story.
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on September 10, 2011, 09:17:26 AM
A diesel hybrid doesn't make much sense in a passenger car/light truck application yet.
If you take a look at a Ford or Toyota hybrid system (full hybrid) the electric motors (high torque) get the vehicle moving and then the gas engine (lower torque/higher horsepower) takes over. The electric motors provide boosts when needed, such as for passing.
A diesel is low rpm/high torque, so it's really difficult to make that work with the conventional hybrids we have today.
You must be thinking of a traditional style diesel. Modern diesels have no problem keeping up with gas cars, and the handful of prototype diesel hybrids have shown amazing mileage.
My Golf TDI performs best on the highway anyhow. They just need to be geared properly.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 10, 2011, 09:22:21 AM
You must be thinking of a traditional style diesel. Modern diesels have no problem keeping up with gas cars, and the handful of prototype diesel hybrids have shown amazing mileage.
My Golf TDI performs best on the highway anyhow. They just need to be geared properly.
What would you gain by adding a hybrid system to a diesel?
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on September 10, 2011, 09:37:28 AM
What would you gain by adding a hybrid system to a diesel?
Personally, I'd say nothing because I like diesels straight up. But using the gas/hybrid paradigm, one can swap the gas with a diesel and get far better fuel mileage.
The VW and Volvo diesel prototypes got around 80-85 mpg.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 10, 2011, 09:42:39 AM
The VW and Volvo diesel prototypes got around 80-85 mpg.
From what I could find on the interwebz, both of those are plug-in diesel hybrids.
And VW is releasing a Jetta Gas/Electric Hybrid next year.
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on September 10, 2011, 10:14:39 AM
From what I could find on the interwebz, both of those are plug-in diesel hybrids.
And VW is releasing a Jetta Gas/Electric Hybrid next year.
Yeah, the Volvo model is, but I don't see why that makes a difference -- they specifically tout the highway abilities of the 215hp diesel motor. It's surprising they have such a high output motor in it. My '98 S70T5 was the turbo model 2.2L gasser and it put out >230 hp with no mods.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 10, 2011, 11:31:35 AM
Yeah, the Volvo model is, but I don't see why that makes a difference -- they specifically tout the highway abilities of the 215hp diesel motor. <snip>
Huh?
If a vehicle can run on electric only for 30+ miles, you'd see a huge increase in net MPG. And for many drivers, that amount of range will either get them to their destination or to the highway where most vehicles get better fuel economy since the engine is closer to, or in, it's optimum operating range.
the way people drive now, here in Dallas at least, means no one will ever see 40+ mpg's.
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on September 10, 2011, 09:17:26 AM
A diesel hybrid doesn't make much sense in a passenger car/light truck application yet.
If you take a look at a Ford or Toyota hybrid system (full hybrid) the electric motors (high torque) get the vehicle moving and then the gas engine (lower torque/higher horsepower) takes over. The electric motors provide boosts when needed, such as for passing.
A diesel is low rpm/high torque, so it's really difficult to make that work with the conventional hybrids we have today.
If you're thinking along the lines of running the diesel as a generator (as they do in a locomotive) that would be a different story.
Hybrids also recapture some energy that is lost in a conventional vehicle. Such as regenerative braking and charging the batteries during idling when stopped.
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on September 10, 2011, 03:42:10 PM
Huh?
If a vehicle can run on electric only for 30+ miles, you'd see a huge increase in net MPG. And for many drivers, that amount of range will either get them to their destination or to the highway where most vehicles get better fuel economy since the engine is closer to, or in, it's optimum operating range.
Not sure what you meant. I understand how a pure hybrid and a plug-in hybrid are different, but I thought the plug in was just the same thing with the added ability to charge the batteries when parked.
I always liked top gears view of the Prius
BMW M3 against Toyota Prius (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=badoMjA_rW0#)
Mass transit is still the best solution to the carbon footprint problem. Though it is only available in larger cities. Personally I would love to see electric motorcycle's if they were allowed the same parking privileges of a scooter but could keep up with highway speed traffic. Give me a TTX GP bike at a 10K price & let me park on the sidewalk & that would be my next bike.
capirex: Give me a TTX GP bike at a 10K price & let me park on the sidewalk & that would be my next bike.
[clap]
how do they calculate 30 miles? straight driving? mixed or heavy traffic?
because if its 30 miles of straight driving, then you're not going to get a 1/3rd of that in heavy traffic. which means the damn thing is useless anyway.
I am pulling this number out of my ass, but i think its safe to say a good 50% of the gas in the world that is used in automobiles is wasted idling because of traffic.
There was a day in NYC where a HUGE chunk of taxi drivers went on strike, there was absolutely NO traffic that day. WIth an esitmated 13,000 cabs in the city and a rough estimate of 80% of them not showing up for work, i was baffled on how little traffic there was, that all meant less fuel spent stuck in traffic.
Quote from: He Man on September 11, 2011, 06:53:44 PM
how do they calculate 30 miles? straight driving? mixed or heavy traffic?
because if its 30 miles of straight driving, then you're not going to get a 1/3rd of that in heavy traffic. which means the damn thing is useless anyway.
I am pulling this number out of my ass, but i think its safe to say a good 50% of the gas in the world that is used in automobiles is wasted idling because of traffic.
There was a day in NYC where a HUGE chunk of taxi drivers went on strike, there was absolutely NO traffic that day. WIth an esitmated 13,000 cabs in the city and a rough estimate of 80% of them not showing up for work, i was baffled on how little traffic there was, that all meant less fuel spent stuck in traffic.
Since no electricity is used to power the car when not in motion traffic only the power consumed by lights, radio etc. come into play.
Quote from: howie on September 11, 2011, 09:27:20 PM
Since no electricity is used to power the car when not in motion traffic only the power consumed by lights, radio etc. come into play.
I imagine these cars won't be popular in places that are hot where air conditioning is required.
Quote from: howie on September 11, 2011, 09:27:20 PM
Since no electricity is used to power the car when not in motion traffic only the power consumed by lights, radio etc. come into play.
But isnt more electricity used to get the car moving from dead stop? The motor needs a higher demand to initally start spinning. You keep doing that to go 2 feet. and im sure the drain is going to be much higher than advertised.
Quote from: He Man on September 12, 2011, 06:11:39 AM
But isnt more electricity used to get the car moving from dead stop? The motor needs a higher demand to initally start spinning. You keep doing that to go 2 feet. and im sure the drain is going to be much higher than advertised.
...and then add a 90 deg summer day to the mix...
Quote from: il d00d on September 09, 2011, 02:32:24 PMThe environmental impact of fracking (drilling holes in the ground to extract petroleum, leaking some of in to the ground water) is about the same as geothermal (drilling holes into the ground to extract water, leaking water into the ground water). This argument is absurd.
Enough with the trolling.
Hmm, gee, let's see, oh yeah the same drilling fluids used to drill and frack nat gas wells is the same drilling fluid used to drill major geothermal wells. The first few thousand feet of any major well whether it be petro or geotherm is cased off which also includes the fresh water zone; i.e. no fracs occur there. One of the primary evaluation activities in a geothermal well is looking for fractures and sealing them off with, wait for it, drilling fluids. Why, because water loss in a geothermal well is bad and reduces its efficiency. Of course you knew that from listening to NPR. I get my information from walking down a hall full of MS and PhD engineers and scientists everyday. FYI, fracking has been occurring since the 1950's. The only thing that has changed is now we can obtain enough nat gas to substantially reduce the USA's dependence on foreign petroleum and resultantly there's a shit load of money to be made or in the case of greeny weenies file lawsuits to get some of becasue they never have anything of benefit to add to the world that anyone wants to buy.
Quote from: He Man on September 12, 2011, 06:11:39 AM
But isnt more electricity used to get the car moving from dead stop? The motor needs a higher demand to initally start spinning. You keep doing that to go 2 feet. and im sure the drain is going to be much higher than advertised.
Yes, but not as bad as an IC engine since electric motors have the same torque at any RPM plus many hybrids have regenerative braking which charges the batteries while braking to a stop. Most EVs with regenerative braking do better in city traffic than a highway cruize, though maybe not if you have the AC on full tilt etc.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 12, 2011, 07:10:46 AM
...and then add a 90 deg summer day to the mix...
Let em sweat [evil]
Quote from: He Man on September 12, 2011, 06:11:39 AM
But isnt more electricity used to get the car moving from dead stop? The motor needs a higher demand to initally start spinning. You keep doing that to go 2 feet. and im sure the drain is going to be much higher than advertised.
with the amount of torque an electric motor makes, it doesn't take much to get it rolling.
not to mention a portion of that will be regenerated when the brakes are applied (it's actually the electric motors turning into generators at that point).
And yes, you are correct that most poor fuel economy situations are caused by idling, and starting from a stop.
there is a reason cabbies are fond of hybrids. their gas bills are much lower.
the A/C is run off the electric side of a hybrid vehicle. yes it negatively affects fuel economy, but not nearly as much as if it were run off the gasoline engine.
Re: He Man's point about idling.
Kinda cool - worksheet on how much gas you save by idling less.
http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/361.pdf (http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/361.pdf)
By these numbers and if I used half my average tank idling, it would mean I spend about eight hours per 15 gallon tank (or about a work week in my thirsty FX35) idling, with the AC on - that would be more than an hour a day, or about as long as my commute is, both ways. I don't think I quite reach that number, but I likely use more than I suspected.