Car-free (and sympathetic) cyclists who are also of a spiritual bent may be interested in this website I just discovered:
Enjoy!Originally Posted by De-motorize Your Soul
For the past 100 years the average speed at which human beings and their souls travel has steadily increased
Only relative to the earth.
We've always been hurtling at 10's of 1000's of miles per second thru the universe.
Hold on tight.
Looks like a new site. I hope they continue to add content. Maybe some of us will contribute stuff. I've been riding my mountain bike in the snowy woods most mornings this week. The average speed on my computer has been 8.9 mph, trying to stay upright on the trails in snow and on ice. Is that slow enough? I have been so peaceful and content at work, after starting my day in slowness, and away from the motors.
"Think Outside the Cage"
I love the idea of giving up your car for lent. That's sublime.
eh I don't know, if I was capable of pedaling myself at 60 mph I'd have no objection to it lol
if its so wrong?
why does going fast feel so good?
I don't understand what speed has to do with oil. The Tesla Motors' new electric car can go 0-60 in 4 seconds with a top speed of 130mph. If you have solar/wind power at your home and recharge the car there you're using a car with zero emissions.
I agree. Riding fast is fun, and it can be more pracical for distance travel also. But there's a different allure to going slowly. With bikes, you can do either or both. It's actually hard to go slow in a car, and it's hard to go fast as a pedestrian. So we have the best of both worlds.Originally Posted by sleazy
Another thing you figure out on a bike: If you're going a long distance, you might get there sooner if you go more slowly. (Roody's Paradox)
"Think Outside the Cage"
Well, my soul sure enjoys rocketing down the autobahn at a steady 179 mph.
Wow! What kind of bike do you ride that fast?Originally Posted by 993guy
"Think Outside the Cage"
A steady 288Km/hr? Where, which autobahn? I've driven all around Bitburg, Trier and everywhere else in Germany especially south of Frankfurt. I don't know where you could maintain that speed.Originally Posted by 993guy
I was once driving my German Spec '86 Toyota Corolla at a routine 100mph on A48 near Trier and got passed en masse by a group of about 15 Motorcyclists who had to be going at least 40-50 mph faster than me. But I doubt they could maintain that speed for long, that Autobahn was too busy for that.Originally Posted by Roody
manufacturing these things isnt very environmentaly friendy, and although they are more efficient, it doesnt make the non renewable resource problem go away, not on the scale of auto usage we enjoy now, and the emissions just get shifted out of direct sightOriginally Posted by donrhummy
also, beware of these specs for these electric cars, at 30F you can knock off about 50%, the rules of physics and chemical batteries still applies
fast electric cars have been around for quite sometime, the physics and designs arent anything miraculous
The A60 between Bitburg and Wittlich is almost completely empty early on Sunday mornings. Shy of a few corners you can really book through there. Plus, I was exaggerating a bit as I would certainly not try to really maintain 180 for longer than a few minutes at a time. Things are moving so fast after a few minutes yourt body begins to climatize and it doesn't feel fast anymore. That's when it gets real dangerous. I've only done it a few times as it is a tremendous waste of gas.
Although there is pollution associated with battery production, I'd guess they tend to cut overall emissions by a factor of three to four. They do require more energy to *build, but the pollution released while in operation is easily a quarter of what's released by a comparable gasoline vehicle. They are after all, four times more energy efficient well to wheel than gasoline powered cars are.Originally Posted by pedex
The only electric cars that have trouble with lower temperatures are home/hobbiest built versions. Any EV engineered with a lick of common sense will have a insulated, temperature regulated battery pack, like the Tesla Roadster does. You could just as easily complain about how straight water freezes in the cooling systems of ICE powered vehicles, but we don't use straight water for a reason. Just like a well engineered EV will have active thermal management.
To illustrate the efficiency of an EV, over 10,000 miles a sportscar like the Roadster will use ~2,000kwh of electricity per year, which is enough to power two fridges during the same time interval. A gas car that averages 25mph will use 400gallons~13,000kwh of gasoline per year. An interesting irony is that each gallon of gasoline requires at least 4.5kwh to extract, refine and distributed. The likely figure is probably somewhere around 6kwh per gallon of gas since it requires more than a lot of other petroleum products. So, we could either use energy to refine gasoline, which will take us ~10,000 miles in a year in a gasoline vehicle, or would could use that energy to directly power an EV, which should take us ~12,000 miles. With little to no pollution.
We are literally trading the some amount of clean useful energy, for slightly less useful energy, with all the pollution that comes with burning hydrocarbons. This happens because oil companies want to sell as much oil as they can, while they can. Sure, we could get more useful work and a fraction of the pollution if we used the natural gas/electricity directly, but then they wouldn't sell any oil... Oil use is all about profit.
*Something like 10% of total energy used during the life of a ICE powered vehicle, so a BEV probably requires at most, twice that amount.
Last edited by lyeinyoureye; 01-12-07 at 06:19 PM.
"active thermal management" meaning heating the battery box or compartment means electric usage, lots of it, not all cars are in garages, The Tesla roadster everyone keeps raving about is useless if it sits outside in the cold overnight unless an external power source is provided to keep it warm, which btw, it does NOT have. The Tesla is a really bad example, the EV-1 formerly made by GM would be better really.
and please provide ample, accurate, and well annotated links to your other statements
The EV-1 was not a production automobile, and is one of the worst examples around, I bet there are private conversions with better battery insulation. It was made to comply with the CA ZEV mandate, while at the same time, GM fought this mandate. It was leased so that retrieval and destruction would be quick and easy. The Tesla Roadster is a production vehicle, that's being sold. The amount of heat needed by a resistive element depends on the R value of the insulation, the size of the box, and the outside temperature. Odds are, the Tesla uses an insulated box with a fairly high R value so the electricity (and drain on the pack) needed for resistive heating is minimized.
I'm not going to run through every single detail on all these since it'd take too long. If you'd like, I can come back later when I have the time and go through them in more detail, but for now I'll tell you what to look for.
Comparative mileage, well to wheels - The equivalent mpg figure, including charging efficiency, is located in the notes for the Tesla White Paper, iirc it's something like ~150mpg. Wikipedia has plenty on power plant efficiency, which depends on the power sources, it's generally ~40%. Electrical transmission efficiency is ~93%, fossil fuel extraction efficiency is ~83%. The average new car in America gets something south of 25mpg. This should be all you need here.
The electricity used per gallon of petroleum product produced is based on this CA gov web page. It details the natural gas and electricity inputs for each barrel extracted and refined. The 4.5kwh per gallon refers to the energy that's spread equally across all ~40 gallons per barrel. Gasoline refining requires much more than bunker fuel or asphalt, and is probably closer to 6kwh per gallon based on the relative energy needed per process (it's somewhere, I'll find it later) and talks I've had with former industry peoplez. Take the energy from natural gas we could be getting by burning it in a plant plus the energy from electricity divided by the gallons of refined product we produce to get the electricity/NG kwh input per gallon.
Feel free to ask me about anything you feel I missed.
ya, you missed a big one
the costs in both resources and actual money to replace the existing fleet of vehicles with electric
currently all the numbers ive seen show that production of even hybrids is more resource intensive than building an SUV twice the size, and even with economies of scale, unless some new battery tech comes along that doesnt exist yet, there will be massive problems, it will still mean less vehicles and much less VMT(vehicle miles traveled)---------this is assuming of course that population growth and everything else in our McWorld keeps on keeping on, it is a systemic situation, just an auto mode change doesnt even come close to fixing the issues
you wanna get down to the nitty gritty instead of looking at the big picture, ok, figure out or find out how much extra its gonna cost energy wise to keep those batteries warm and how much extra space it will cost interior space wise, sorry, but the dismissive reply above doesnt cut it, its a real issue that will HAVE to be dealt with, and electric heat is a big loss
then take your numbers youve been posting for quite awhile now and start knocking off like 15% or more, because honestly, most seem quite optimistic versus what will happen in reality, cars arent just used in perfect weather on flat roads or on test tracks
we're going to be facing other challenges as well, like water for example, that is already rearing its ugly head in the oil and gas drilling industry, we be running into problems with ALL these things, natural gas, metals, water, etc etc
the reason I brought up the EV-1 is because its one of the few electric vehicles made in any real quantity will real world numbers to look at, the Tesla so far does not have this, not even close, and the EV-1 also is more like what a car is today, not a hotrod toy for the rich
there are a few conversions that have been around for quite awhile, like the ford fiesta and honda civic's, same with the prius plug in conversions, and they too also show that the numbers tend to run on the optimistic side vs what happens in real life
I think your gonna find, when its cold out, heating that battery pack, and then running the electric heat in that car to keep the interior warm and de-ice the windows when driving will bear out what has been known about these things since day one, they have their issues, they arent a panacea in any way.
Are they good enough to replace what the average driver needs, yup, I think they are, but unfortunately, it isnt the only issue. We will have other just as, if not more serious issues to deal with.
I always found that the fastest traffic on a routine basis was on the 8 lane (4 each way) A5 between Darmstadt and Frankfurt. The left lane was full of tailgating cars all going at least 200km/h. Quite a thrill for first time tourists renting cars from the Airport.Originally Posted by 993guy
Bit like recumbents, really...Originally Posted by pedex
Dream. Dare. Do.
I thought the topic proposed by the original post was fairly interesting. Maybe we can return to it?Originally Posted by JohnBrooking
"Think Outside the Cage"
Sure. Contribute your wisdom, or mysticism, or whatever you like. Just do it.Originally Posted by Roody
How un-American!Originally Posted by donrhummy
See quote below, thank you.Originally Posted by 993guy
Originally Posted by Roody
I completely agree with the McWorld side. Using 3-7,000lb vehicles to transport a 200lb human or two is nuts. But... So is using inefficient fossil fuel powered engines. It's all about keeping demand, price, and profits up. Soaring like the proud eagle. etc... As for the numbers you're referring to, they must made up, do you have any links to the study (please don't bring up GM's dust to dust study, where they claim an H3 will go 300,000 miles and a Prius barely 100,000, every Toyota I've owned has gone over 150,000 miles, and will probably go more). In order to get a vehicle that's twice the size of a 3000lb Prius for instance, we need to go for a ~6000-7000lb SUV. The Prius costs $23,000 w/o the hybrid credit/s, and the two corresponding SUVs that fit the twice the size mantra cost $30-37,000 iirc. So, if building a hybrid is really twice as resource intensive, shouldn't vehicles that are twice as large have the same MSRP? They should. The reality is, hybrids command a 15-30% cost premium, depending on the vehicle. Which, for the average driver, will be paid back over the life of the vehicle. Battery longevity was only an issue with M/T Honda Insight's, and current vehicle packs should go past 160,000 miles.Originally Posted by pedex
However, it is clear from data collected to date, that battery performance is sufficient to provide stable vehicle fuel economy over a 160,000 mile HEV life.Well,Originally Posted by pedex
So if I'm reading this right, when we have something with an R value of say, 30, like three inches of Silica aerogel, the inside will be 30 degrees warmer than the outside.The R-value is the reciprocal of the amount of heat energy per area of material per degree difference between the outside and inside.
So, assuming the batteries have 40lbs of water for thermal management, the outside temperature is -10 degrees C or 15 degrees F, and the pack has an R value of 30, the battery management system will need to raise the water temperature by 10 degrees C in order to have a temperature of 25 degrees C, or 75 degrees F. This requires 400btu, or .11kwh. The car has a 50kwh battery pack, so this will require less than a percent of the total pack energy.The British system unit of heat is the British Thermal Unit, or BTU. A BTU is the quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of a pound of water one degree Fahrenheit.
Ah, well... Sure, why not? We can take into account lead footed drivers and we'll get that both the roadster and average car has 15% worse mileage than what the EPA measures. Or in my hands, they may both have 30% better. The point is, to compare them using the same test. From that we get how much more efficient one is than the other. It doesn't matter what the test is, so long as both vehicle types go through it for an accurate comparison.Originally Posted by pedex
Well, sure. But, the more efficiently we use any resource, the less likely we are to have trouble with it. This runs contrary with our economic system, since in order to maximize profit, many companies have to sell as much of their product as quickly as possible. If there's one thing we have no want for, it's energy. We waste it left and right. Inefficient transportation, housing, fridges, etc... Any increase in efficiency is good for the consumer, but bad for business.Originally Posted by pedex
Well, this brings up another good point about the Roadster. It's not mass market. Why? Because, the companies that have the ability to mass produce EVs/HEVs with decent all electric range and plug-in availability won't. So, the only way to show electric car tech is mature is to have it compete with low production gas vehicles, because then there is no drop in price due to mass production. And the results are great, the driver gets a faster, more reliable car for way less cash, compared to a similar igh end gas car. The EV-1 was a car that was, to a large extent, designed as a stop-gap while GM fought the ZEV mandate in court. They could've made it more aerodynamic, and insulated the pack, etc... But they only had to make an electric car, not a great electric car.Originally Posted by pedex
Well sure. Dimwitted drivers can bring down the range of any car, but the point I'm making is that the way the roadster is designed, heating the batt pack is not going to have a significant impact on range. In fact, the heater and A/C would probably take way more energy.Originally Posted by pedex
40 lbs of water LOL?
uh, that battery pack will likely weigh up around 1000lbs using current technology for lead acid batteries, less for lithium ion, still the whole mass has to be kept warm, on top of that the insulation idea also has a problem, the heat must be gotten rid of as the pack is discharged, which is where batteries lose much of their efficiency, heat and internal resistance
then you also have a material problem, one which plagues the "fuel cell" as well, the materials needed to manufacture them are rare and expensive and do not exist in sufficient quantities to build massive numbers of vehicles
lithium ion batteries use cobalt these days
still, after all this, it still takes lots of oil and water and other materials to manufacture these things, and building electric cars with current tech is very resource intensive, more so that ICE powered vehicles
factor in all this together and like I said above, electric is no panacea, its not a magic bullet that will solve problems, it has all the same problems any possible solution does, energy density, materials needed, scale of the problem etc etc etc plus another rarely mentioned problem---> accidents
in order to make these things safe for the road costs weight and space and hence range, we dont want to be in a situation where a HAZMAT crew has to be called every time someone totals their electric car on the freeway, putting in a block of batteries with 400 or more volts and lots of amp-hrs is alot like packaging a small chemical bomb especially when some of these battery types have runaway issues already, can that be done, sure, but again it has its costs
you take a look at any of the existing electric cars, the serious ones that really are road ready and drive prettymuch like any other car and are relatively affordable, and they dont do too well, is it good enough? from a usage standpoint probably, from a manufacturing standpoint, nope, not even close