Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Overview of Early Electric Cars

lowtechmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 106 posts

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#61

Post by cujo »

mattlondon wrote: post #53
ianai wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I drive a 250 mile round trip every week or every other. Range does matter.

250 miles is within range of a bunch of different cars - and not just Tesla or luxury brands but also Fords, Skodas, Nissan, and Volkswagens too. At UK speed limits that is like 3.5 continuous hours driven at 70mph (in reality you'd not be doing 70 all the time either)... Most people would take a bio break and maybe a coffee in there somewhere and fast charging for 15 mins at 100+kw can give some decent top-up (e.g.…

The catch is when it's cold out. I'm in a similar situation. ~120 miles one way. My Nissan Leaf gets ~140 miles per charge, and it works fine in the spring/summer/fall.

In the winter I get about 90 miles on full charge, so not only am I stopping to charge, but I have to be at full charge when I leave. Also consider that the only fast charging station on my route is right around 30 miles in, and I'm running "on fumes" every trip.

I know there are cars with bigger batteries that will make it. But I also know they are another ~$10k, which is a significant upcharge.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#62

Post by VBprogrammer »

fy20 wrote: post #39

Does anyone have any reading material on the history of control systems of electric vehicles? Today most EVs use AC motors with a inverter - a bunch of power transistors - that convert DC to AC, adjusting the frequency as required by the motor (that's what the hum you hear is). However obviously that wasn't the case 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago when electric (trolley) buses were still used in many parts of the…

Electric trams of the era used essentially large resistors banks and series parallel switching to control power. I expect it was much the same for electric cars, perhaps tapping off or rewiring part of the battery bank. The total amount of power probably made simple on-off control almost practical anyway.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#63

Post by Robotbeat »

lenkite wrote: post #54
clouddrover wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you need to think about what it means when all cars are electric. Current charging speeds lead to long queues at chargers like this: https://www.thedrive.com/news/31274/more-teslas-on-the-road-... No car on the road at the moment is capable of making full use of 350 kW CCS chargers (the Porsche Taycan comes closest at 270 kW). Ideally you'd want a flat charging curve at 350 kW to allow for more cars to be served…

They really need to make swappable batteries which are pre-charged and ready to 'fit in'. This current charging network simply does not scale IMHO.

They don’t. Tesla tried and stopped after a short time. It’s just not worth it as charging has got much better.

Charging scales better than any other new load we’ve added to the grid (such as air conditioning) as the vast majority of charging will be flexible within roughly 24 hours. After doubling like once a decade or so for a century, electricity demand has been constant or even falling for the last 5-10 years, which has been a major strain on utility finances. The extra flexible demand from electric cars is going to be hugely important for funding the maintenance and upgrading of our electric grid.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#64

Post by Robotbeat »

clouddrover wrote: post #5
Robotbeat wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they are. Most new electric cars are like at least 250 mile range, and Tesla's flagship Model S starts out at over 400 mile range (and their 520 mile range version will be available in about 12 months... that's more than most conventionally fueled cars). Charge speed is fine (you'll spend less time overall than you spend at gas stations) and safety is overall superior. Battery life is also not a concern as th…

No, you need to think about what it means when all cars are electric. Current charging speeds lead to long queues at chargers like this: https://www.thedrive.com/news/31274/more-teslas-on-the-road-... No car on the road at the moment is capable of making full use of 350 kW CCS chargers (the Porsche Taycan comes closest at 270 kW). Ideally you'd want a flat charging curve at 350 kW to allow for more cars to be served…

This is just the wrong way to think about scaling electric cars.

Current electric cars do about 90% of their charging at home. As the battery size increases, this number would (for the same people) actually INCREASE. I do DC fast charging for my 80 mile range Leaf, but for well over a year I haven’t gone more than 100 miles from home with it. If I had a 250 mile Bolt or whatever, I would’ve had no reason for any away from home charging. 300, 400, and 500 mile electric cars (like Tesla offers) have even less reason to charge not-at-home.

And Level 1 and 2 charging at home or work or other destinations is WAY cheaper per watt of installed charging capacity than DC fast chargers. So if you want ubiquitous electric cars, the solution isn’t to just scale out DC fast charging, but instead make exterior outlets ubiquitous. Add a relay-controlled outlet to every light pole and parking meter. All apartment parking lots. Many business parking lots.

Cost per watt for DC fast chargers is around $1. For a home charger, it’s about $0.10 to $0.20, and often essentially “free” as you just use the included charger and plug into an external outlet or a drier outlet in a garage.

DC fast charging stations should be reduced in cost, but you don’t need to increase the speed that much as there are diminishing returns to doing so. Just add more slots.

It is on long trips where DC fast charging is largely unavoidable, but even still, 500 mile range covers quite a lot of area and all but likely-multi-day trips. If I can charge at my destination, I don’t necessarily need a fast charger.

The solution is to make sure there’s enough L1 (external outlets, which are only like $100 apiece) and L2 chargers (can be bought for as low as $200 now... with installation cost no more than, say, an RV or drier outlet) so that you DON’T need such massive DC fast charging infrastructure.

This is hard when few people have electric cars but becomes much easier when most people do as apartment complexes will install outlets on parking spaces as a matter of course. Same for workplaces, metered parking spots, etc.

A cheap IOT-controlled-relay external outlet is something that would really help make this more practical. Hard to get traction when electric cars are a small portion of overall cars.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#65

Post by Robotbeat »

erik_seaberg wrote: post #15
clouddrover wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there will still need to be more charge points than there are fuel pumps but your charging won't necessarily be exclusively at DC fast chargers. It will be a mix of DC and AC charging. For example, if you're on a road trip you might DC fast charge during the day and then slow charge overnight at a hotel so you start the day with a full battery.

I guess it's feasible, but as of last year I've never seen a charger at a hotel. My office had maybe a dozen, which is already not enough—EV drivers were required to go outside and move their cars after a few hours. I don't know how often someone who needs one is screwed.

I always charge at my AirBNB. Just need an external 120V outlet. An RV-style outlet would work for L2 power levels. That’s not that uncommon.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#66

Post by clouddrover »

Robotbeat wrote: post #63
lenkite wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They really need to make swappable batteries which are pre-charged and ready to 'fit in'. This current charging network simply does not scale IMHO.

They don’t. Tesla tried and stopped after a short time. It’s just not worth it as charging has got much better. Charging scales better than any other new load we’ve added to the grid (such as air conditioning) as the vast majority of charging will be flexible within roughly 24 hours. After doubling like once a decade or so for a century, electricity demand has been constant or even falling for the last 5-10 years, wh…

> Tesla tried and stopped after a short time. It’s just not worth it as charging has got much better.

Nio has succeeded where Tesla failed. Nio does swapping and charging:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a33670482/nio-swappable-ba...

https://insideevs.com/news/448165/nio-completed-1-millionth-...

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#67

Post by clouddrover »

Robotbeat wrote: post #64
clouddrover wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you need to think about what it means when all cars are electric. Current charging speeds lead to long queues at chargers like this: https://www.thedrive.com/news/31274/more-teslas-on-the-road-... No car on the road at the moment is capable of making full use of 350 kW CCS chargers (the Porsche Taycan comes closest at 270 kW). Ideally you'd want a flat charging curve at 350 kW to allow for more cars to be served…

This is just the wrong way to think about scaling electric cars. Current electric cars do about 90% of their charging at home. As the battery size increases, this number would (for the same people) actually INCREASE. I do DC fast charging for my 80 mile range Leaf, but for well over a year I haven’t gone more than 100 miles from home with it. If I had a 250 mile Bolt or whatever, I would’ve had no reason for any away…

> This is just the wrong way to think about scaling electric cars.

Nope. It's the practical reality of what needs to happen when there are ever more electric cars on the road.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#68

Post by Hypx »

mattlondon wrote: post #25

It is interesting to see sentiment change over the years on hacker news. First EVs were too expensive. Then they were too slow/couldn't tow. Then the range was too small. Now people are griping that they can't "refuel" in 5 mins. I guess we will see what the next excuse becomes for people to continue polluting and why EVs "aren't ready" for their hypothetical/once-a-year/niche needs. Sigh.

The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around. Nearly all of the criticism of this argument are just a mirror of the arguments against EVs (often made by pro-EV people no less).

So the real misunderstanding isn't with anti-EV people, but with pro-EV denying that there's a future beyond EVs.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#69

Post by dragonwriter »

Hypx wrote: post #68
mattlondon wrote: post #25

It is interesting to see sentiment change over the years on hacker news. First EVs were too expensive. Then they were too slow/couldn't tow. Then the range was too small. Now people are griping that they can't "refuel" in 5 mins. I guess we will see what the next excuse becomes for people to continue polluting and why EVs "aren't ready" for their hypothetical/once-a-year/niche needs. Sigh.

The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around. Nearly all of the criticism of this argument are just a mirror of the arguments against EVs (often made by pro-EV people no less). So the real misunderstanding isn't with anti-EV people, but with pro-EV denying that there's a future beyond EVs.

> The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around.

Fuel cell cars are EVs.

Re: Overview of Early Electric Cars

#70

Post by Hypx »

dragonwriter wrote: post #69
Hypx wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around. Nearly all of the criticism of this argument are just a mirror of the arguments against EVs (often made by pro-EV people no less). So the real misunderstanding isn't with anti-EV people, but with pro-EV denying that there's a future beyond EVs.

> The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around. Fuel cell cars are EVs.

Yes, but people get confused. Hence why EVs should be referred to as BEVs, and fuel cell cars as FCEVs.
Post reply on HN