I've decided to buy an electric car to do my part

[elektra]

Post yours.

Been there, done that, and will again.

No Sea Level Rise says Isle of the Dead

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant. In 1841 Captain Sir James Clark Ross, marked the mean level of the sea. It is funny to note, that back in 1841 that people had a better...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Flopper]

I read an interesting article about electric powered cars, "In 1910, Electric cars were the best cars on the road. What happened" If you're are interest, the link is below. By 1920, 90% of taxis in New York City were electric. Delivery wagons were being replaced by electric vehicles capable of pulling thousands of pounds. Henry Ford who was becoming one of the richest men in America from sales of his Model T, invested 31 million dollar in a partnership with his old boss, Thomas Edison to develop an inexpensive electric car. Ironically, a hundred years later Ford would invest 135 million once again to develop an inexpensive electric car.

In 1910, Electric Cars Were the Best Vehicles on the Road. What Happened?

EVs ran into Ford's whims, Edison's unfit batteries, big oil, and the ancient question of charging stations.

www.inverse.com

 

[westwall]

I read an interesting article about electric powered cars, "In 1910, Electric cars were the best cars on the road. What happened" If you're are interest, the link is below. By 1920, 90% of taxis in New York City were electric. Delivery wagons were being replaced by electric vehicles capable of pulling thousands of pounds. Henry Ford who was becoming one of the richest men in America from sales of his Model T, invested 31 million dollar in a partnership with his old boss, Thomas Edison to develop an inexpensive electric car. Ironically, a hundred years later Ford would invest 135 million once again to develop an inexpensive electric car.

In 1910, Electric Cars Were the Best Vehicles on the Road. What Happened?

EVs ran into Ford's whims, Edison's unfit batteries, big oil, and the ancient question of charging stations.

www.inverse.com

What happened was the internal combustion engine was far easier to develop, and was many times more efficient than the electric cars.

They STILL are.

 

[Woodznutz]

I read an interesting article about electric powered cars, "In 1910, Electric cars were the best cars on the road. What happened" If you're are interest, the link is below. By 1920, 90% of taxis in New York City were electric. Delivery wagons were being replaced by electric vehicles capable of pulling thousands of pounds. Henry Ford who was becoming one of the richest men in America from sales of his Model T, invested 31 million dollar in a partnership with his old boss, Thomas Edison to develop an inexpensive electric car. Ironically, a hundred years later Ford would invest 135 million once again to develop an inexpensive electric car.

In 1910, Electric Cars Were the Best Vehicles on the Road. What Happened?

EVs ran into Ford's whims, Edison's unfit batteries, big oil, and the ancient question of charging stations.

www.inverse.com

They were so quiet that people often didn't hear them coming, so some cities required devices be installed that made sounds to warn pedestrians that an electric car was approaching.

 

[Flopper]

Says you, a heavier vehicle takes more energy to run. Using energy by storing it, then using that energy requires more energy.

Laws of physics even apply to the inefficient EV's

It takes more energy than if the vehicle were lighter but EVs are far more efficient at converting energy into motion, 77% compared to ICEs whose efficiency runs 12% to 30%. So even if electric version of a vehicle is 35% heavier than the gas equivalent which is typical, the EV will use far less energy than the gas equivalent.

Although the efficiency of EV's are much better than ICE vehicles, the greatest advantage is efficiency of producing and delivery electric energy to the vehicle vs the production and delivery of gasoline. The overall efficiency of producing, and transmitting electric energy varies 35% to 85%, the weighted average is about 55%. This compares to efficiency of producing gasoline which is about 22%.

All-Electric Vehicles

All-electric vehicles (EVs) are efficient, produce no tailpipe emissions, and help increase energy security. See if an EV is right for you!

www.fueleconomy.gov

Nissan Hatchbacks | 2023 and 2024 Models From Nissan's Lineup of Hatchbacks

Nissan Hatchbacks: Check out the entire lineup of Nissan Hatchbacks discover new Nissan Hatchbacks on the market today and compare price options, engine, performance, interior space and more

carbuzz.com

Power Generation Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[westwall]

It takes more energy than if the vehicle were lighter but EVs are far more efficient at converting energy into motion, 77% compared to ICEs whose efficiency runs 12% to 30%. So even if electric version of a vehicle is 35% heavier than the gas equivalent which is typical, the EV will use far less energy than the gas equivalent.

Although the efficiency of EV's are much better than ICE vehicles, the greatest advantage is efficiency of producing and delivery electric energy to the vehicle vs the production and delivery of gasoline. The overall efficiency of producing, and transmitting electric energy varies 35% to 85%, the weighted average is about 55%. This compares to efficiency of producing gasoline which is about 22%.

All-Electric Vehicles

All-electric vehicles (EVs) are efficient, produce no tailpipe emissions, and help increase energy security. See if an EV is right for you!

www.fueleconomy.gov

Nissan Hatchbacks | 2023 and 2024 Models From Nissan's Lineup of Hatchbacks

Nissan Hatchbacks: Check out the entire lineup of Nissan Hatchbacks discover new Nissan Hatchbacks on the market today and compare price options, engine, performance, interior space and more

carbuzz.com

Power Generation Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

Your numbers only apply once the energy is ON BOARD!

Your numbers ignore the energy used to make the energy that you use to charge your EV.

 

[Flopper]

What happened was the internal combustion engine was far easier to develop, and was many times more efficient than the electric cars.

They STILL are.

I don't think it was either efficiency or ease of development that did in the EVs. I think it was a number of other things.

EVs were the best cars in 1910 and remained so for over 10 years. They were more reliable, did not need to be cranked. Gasoline had to be pumped or pour in tanks where batteries were just swapped at retail outlets. EVs produced no innocuous exhaust, no backfires to wake the babies and scare the horses. The ease of driving made EV a great choice for women where men liked the the more complex gas cars.

EV makers in the 20s decided to advertise their product for women which backfired badly because men controlled the money and men bought the cars. Gas powered auto makers saw their chance to advertise their product for men, painting EVs as a car for women that no real man would consider buying or driving. This advertising campaigns were a disaster for EV manufactures. By the time they turned there marketing toward men it was the mid twenties and it was too late. The growth in sales gas cars spurred investments in improvement that the public loved such as electric starters, heaters, electric wipers, better breaking systems, front wheel drive, 4 wheel drive, and even a hybrid eclectic/gas car.

In the 20's, state, local, and the federal government began building real highways that connected cities and towns. No longer were autos confined to a city. With growing traffic, more gas stations were opened and lack range of EVs became a major problem. The depression killed EV manufactures. They needed a lot of money to improve their product and keep the doors open and there was none to be had. By the end of the depression the EV industry was history. And major automakers and oil companies made sure they did not return in 20th century.

 

[elektra]

It takes more energy than if the vehicle were lighter but EVs are far more efficient at converting energy into motion, 77% compared to ICEs whose efficiency runs 12% to 30%. So even if electric version of a vehicle is 35% heavier than the gas equivalent which is typical, the EV will use far less energy than the gas equivalent.

Although the efficiency of EV's are much better than ICE vehicles, the greatest advantage is efficiency of producing and delivery electric energy to the vehicle vs the production and delivery of gasoline. The overall efficiency of producing, and transmitting electric energy varies 35% to 85%, the weighted average is about 55%. This compares to efficiency of producing gasoline which is about 22%.

All-Electric Vehicles

All-electric vehicles (EVs) are efficient, produce no tailpipe emissions, and help increase energy security. See if an EV is right for you!

www.fueleconomy.gov

Nissan Hatchbacks | 2023 and 2024 Models From Nissan's Lineup of Hatchbacks

Nissan Hatchbacks: Check out the entire lineup of Nissan Hatchbacks discover new Nissan Hatchbacks on the market today and compare price options, engine, performance, interior space and more

carbuzz.com

Power Generation Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

None of your links address the elephant in the room, that would be BATTERIES

Trains run on electricity, but that electricity is not from batteries? How come? If electric cars are so efficient how come we dont have battery powered trains?

Electricity? Yes, electric motors are extremely efficient. What is not efficient is thousands of batteries wired together to make "one" battery.

You know what else is not efficient, converting the DC energy in a battery to AC electricity.

You know what else is not efficient, converting the AC electricity from the grid into DC, to charge the battery.

You know what else is not efficient, wind power at night (or day), the wind is simply gone most nights, hence you will not be "renewable" or "green" charging that car. The inefficiency of fossil fuels is greater when one must convert fossil fuel to AC electricity, then to DC, then back to AC. Electric cars are thus much more inefficient than Gas cars.

You know what else is not efficient, solar power at night, let me know if you want that explained as well.

So, you claim that you can move a heavier object with less energy than a lighter object? Yet you have not provided a link that proves that, you did give three links, two are advertisements at best. The third does not discuss car batteries.

Batteries suck, you idiots act like Duracell and Everready have not spent millions on battery research and you have come up with the solution that has evaded Duracell and Everready for a 100 years.

Either way, building bigger heavier cars to do the work of a lighter car is simply, stupidity.

 

[Flopper]

Your numbers only apply once the energy is ON BOARD!

Your numbers ignore the energy used to make the energy that you use to charge your EV.

No, they do not. As explained in the post and links, the efficiency of putting gasoline in your tank is about 22%. The efficiency of putting electrify in your car is about 55% of which 5% is transmission loss and 60% is the weighted average of generation efficiency from the various fuels and renewables.

So the efficiency of production of fuel for EVs is more efficient than ICEs and efficiency of EVs operation is more efficient than ICEs.

 

[Flopper]

None of your links address the elephant in the room, that would be BATTERIES

Trains run on electricity, but that electricity is not from batteries? How come? If electric cars are so efficient how come we dont have battery powered trains?

Electricity? Yes, electric motors are extremely efficient. What is not efficient is thousands of batteries wired together to make "one" battery.

You know what else is not efficient, converting the DC energy in a battery to AC electricity.

You know what else is not efficient, converting the AC electricity from the grid into DC, to charge the battery.

You know what else is not efficient, wind power at night (or day), the wind is simply gone most nights, hence you will not be "renewable" or "green" charging that car. The inefficiency of fossil fuels is greater when one must convert fossil fuel to AC electricity, then to DC, then back to AC. Electric cars are thus much more inefficient than Gas cars.

You know what else is not efficient, solar power at night, let me know if you want that explained as well.

So, you claim that you can move a heavier object with less energy than a lighter object? Yet you have not provided a link that proves that, you did give three links, two are advertisements at best. The third does not discuss car batteries.

Batteries suck, you idiots act like Duracell and Everready have not spent millions on battery research and you have come up with the solution that has evaded Duracell and Everready for a 100 years.

Either way, building bigger heavier cars to do the work of a lighter car is simply, stupidity.

The efficiency of converting DC to AC in EVs averages 90% and this is included in the efficiently calculation of EV operation. The EV Motor efficiency is 85% to 90%.

Batteries are used on some electric trains now but cost of running most electric trains with over head wires is cheaper. Union Pacific Railroad agreed to buy 20 battery electric freight locomotives from Wabtec and Progress Rail. So it's coming.

 

[elektra]

The efficiency of converting DC to AC in EVs averages 90% and this is included in the efficiently calculation of EV operation. The EV Motor efficiency is 85% to 90%.

Batteries are used on some electric trains now but cost of running most electric trains with over head wires is cheaper. Union Pacific Railroad agreed to buy 20 battery electric freight locomotives from Wabtec and Progress Rail. So it's coming.

Batteries dont run trains. Yeah, I see they are experimenting with california's $trillion$ dollar train from nowhere to nowhere.

Efficiency, it is easy to see that those promoting the thousands of batteries to power one car, or millions of batteries to power a single train have no understanding what efficiency is.

Cheaper is because something is efficient.

You have no idea beyond your propaganda, what efficiency is.

Nothing is more expensive to operate than battery powered cars.

Link to whatever you like. You have nit linked to anything yet that speaks technically of lithium batteries.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

I read an interesting article about electric powered cars, "In 1910, Electric cars were the best cars on the road. What happened" If you're are interest, the link is below. By 1920, 90% of taxis in New York City were electric. Delivery wagons were being replaced by electric vehicles capable of pulling thousands of pounds. Henry Ford who was becoming one of the richest men in America from sales of his Model T, invested 31 million dollar in a partnership with his old boss, Thomas Edison to develop an inexpensive electric car. Ironically, a hundred years later Ford would invest 135 million once again to develop an inexpensive electric car.

In 1910, Electric Cars Were the Best Vehicles on the Road. What Happened?

EVs ran into Ford's whims, Edison's unfit batteries, big oil, and the ancient question of charging stations.

www.inverse.com

The turn of the century electric cars went 20 to 50 miles on a single charge

 

[elektra]

I read an interesting article about electric powered cars, "In 1910, Electric cars were the best cars on the road. What happened" If you're are interest, the link is below. By 1920, 90% of taxis in New York City were electric. Delivery wagons were being replaced by electric vehicles capable of pulling thousands of pounds. Henry Ford who was becoming one of the richest men in America from sales of his Model T, invested 31 million dollar in a partnership with his old boss, Thomas Edison to develop an inexpensive electric car. Ironically, a hundred years later Ford would invest 135 million once again to develop an inexpensive electric car.

In 1910, Electric Cars Were the Best Vehicles on the Road. What Happened?

EVs ran into Ford's whims, Edison's unfit batteries, big oil, and the ancient question of charging stations.

www.inverse.com

Ironic

Last time ford did it because he wanted to, this time ford is being forced to.

 

[Flopper]

The turn of the century electric cars went 20 to 50 miles on a single charge

However their speed was typically limited to about 15 mph but that was fast enough on dirt and gravel streets filled with horse drawn wagons and carriages. Also, most of the cars carried only two people. A few carried 4 but the range and speed were less. There were electric delivery trucks that carried loads up to two thousand pounds but they no faster than a walking pedestrian.

The London electrobus needed 1.5 tons of lead-acid batteries to carry its 34 passengers. It could travel 60km (40 miles) on one charge. So at lunchtime the buses went to a garage in Victoria and drove up a ramp. The batteries, slung under the electrobus, were lowered onto a trolley and replaced with fresh ones. They ran in London from 1907 to 1910. Some buses ran in Brighton till 1917.

 

[krichton]

Batteries dont run trains. Yeah, I see they are experimenting with california's $trillion$ dollar train from nowhere to nowhere.

Efficiency, it is easy to see that those promoting the thousands of batteries to power one car, or millions of batteries to power a single train have no understanding what efficiency is.

Cheaper is because something is efficient.

You have no idea beyond your propaganda, what efficiency is.

Nothing is more expensive to operate than battery powered cars.

Link to whatever you like. You have nit linked to anything yet that speaks technically of lithium batteries.

So.....what you're saying is that gas is way more "efficient?"

 

[westwall]

So.....what you're saying is that gas is way more "efficient?"

Yes. The energy density of gas, and especially gasoline, is far more than any battery.

Put simply, a thimble full of gasoline will push a 3000 pound car about three miles.

The only thing that is more energy dense is explosives, and, of course, nuclear.

 

[BothWings]

However, lithium mining for electric vehicles is incredibly destructive to the environment, and is about as far from “green” as one could imagine. Not to mention, most of the lithium-ion batteries produced today come from China and require water-intensive mining operations that ravage natural environments throughout Australia, Argentina and Chile.

Don't forget Peru.

 

[elektra]

So.....what you're saying is that gas is way more "efficient?"

Without a doubt

 

[Flopper]

Well this was a pretty good thread on EV's while it lasted. With the entrance of Climate Change Deniers, which is off topic I must depart because scientists settled that issue over 10 years ago and it's a waste of time to go over the same stuff. No opinions on this board are going to change.

 

[elektra]

Well this was a pretty good thread on EV's while it lasted. With the entrance of Climate Change Deniers, which is off topic I must depart because scientists settled that issue over 10 years ago and it's a waste of time to go over the same stuff. No opinions on this board are going to change.

There is no consenses amongst scientists that man is changing the climate.

The idea that the solution to this "fake" problem is to build hundreds of millions of bigger heavier cars that use more energy is the biggest scam in history.

Only an idiot is unable to figure out bigger and heavier is not better.