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

Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

timharford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 291 posts

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#171

Post by nebula8804 »

FriedPickles wrote: post #38

To further develop the idea of letting EVs go to people who will drive them the most, the true bottleneck is batteries . So, the problem is to get batteries on the road in a way that they will displace the most gas miles as soon as possible. This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), then in a second stage, replace those with full EVs. For most city vehicles…

I mean your logic is sound but car companies dragged their feet for years on even plug in hybrids and so just like the mulled wine example in the article, it wouldn't work in the real world. GM had an amazing things with the Voltec architecture. ~50 miles on electric was more than enough for even the most discerning customers yet they never really extended it past the Chevy Volt. It should have been rolled out to all of their vehicles. That would help push them to also drive down the cost and eventually make it the standard powertrain on their cars. Over the course of 1 generation you have eliminated a large chunk of co2 emissions from transportation.

Instead they never introduced it to other cars, now they have discontinued the Volt(because who wants an overpriced Chevy Cruze anyway?) and now they nothing for sale because of battery issues.

Battery issues will be resolved in the next few years as more factories come online so I don't see how a "battery hog" issue will arise unless there is a fundamental shortage of raw materials. Seems like the battery companies are also investing in recycling so this eventually becomes a closed loop system.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#172

Post by anamax »

lucian1900 wrote: post #100
robertlagrant wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheap trains and light rail require very high levels of automation. As long as you argue in favour of that as well it makes sense.

Of course. Such automation wouldn’t be sustainable under capitalism because the rate of profit would drop even further, but it would be entirely possible under a socialist economy that produces for use instead of for profit.

> Such automation wouldn’t be sustainable under capitalism because the rate of profit would drop even further

I get that you don't like profits (even though investment to do automation requires profits), but automation reduces costs which INCREASES profits and/or reduces prices.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#173

Post by natch »

sokoloff wrote: post #121
natch wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a Bolt for around $11k after incentives. OK the incentives part is a wrench in the equation to be sure, so it may be hard to answer my question… Are you saying hybrids cost less than that?

Where are the incentives taking the price of a Bolt that low? My LEAF just turned 7 and I'd probably buy a Bolt immediately if I could get one in the $11K range. (The LEAF has been great all around, but only being able to count on 75 miles is annoying from time to time.)

California. I have to admit it’s second hand (and outdated.. last year…) information, but worth looking into imho even though I’d rather see anyone get a Tesla.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#174

Post by AtlasBarfed »

Retric wrote: post #157
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LFP batteries have practically unlimited recharge cycles. Higher density LFPs are coming too. I would agree in general with the parent, but with LFPs hitting mainstream 200-300 mile range in pure EVs, and no real resource constraint, hybrids and "standard range" can be LFP and then NMC chemistries can be dedicated to higher density needs.

10kWh LFP’s don’t last the lifetime of the average plug in hybrid due to regenerative breaking adding a lot of charge cycles when total battery capacity is that low. 30m/s to 0 on a 2000kg vehicle = 900000 J or 0.25kWh, on a at best 10kWh battery adds up.

Really? I remember Jeffrey Dahn saying they were effectively unlimited, for whatever LFP chemistry they were testing, back when the million mile battery was being advertised.

Also LFPs don't have sourcing issues, and I think the minimum range hubrid should be 70 miles, so that would be bigger than 10kwr.

If 10kwhr is only 20-30 miles... I think we should have 25kwhr at a minimum. 20-30 miles becomes like 10 miles in deep winter, and even then the ICE is doing the heat/cooling. You need 70 miles to handle weather range degradation for that sweet 50 mile daily usage range.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#175

Post by Retric »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #174
Retric wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10kWh LFP’s don’t last the lifetime of the average plug in hybrid due to regenerative breaking adding a lot of charge cycles when total battery capacity is that low. 30m/s to 0 on a 2000kg vehicle = 900000 J or 0.25kWh, on a at best 10kWh battery adds up.

Really? I remember Jeffrey Dahn saying they were effectively unlimited, for whatever LFP chemistry they were testing, back when the million mile battery was being advertised. Also LFPs don't have sourcing issues, and I think the minimum range hubrid should be 70 miles, so that would be bigger than 10kwr. If 10kwhr is only 20-30 miles... I think we should have 25kwhr at a minimum. 20-30 miles becomes like 10 miles in…

Bumping things to 25kWh vs 10 kWh and sure that can last the lifetime of the vehicle, but it also means replacing 1 EV with ~3 plug in hybrids vs 8 that the original poster mentioned. And you now have to manufacture and maintain 3 ICE powertrains which further cuts into the savings.

Plug in hybrids can be a great option for many drivers, but IMO they they essentially inherit the downsides of both EV’s and ICE. For example they have issues sitting unused for long periods. Need to replace belts and spark plugs etc. They risk both a battery fire and gasoline fire etc etc.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#177

Post by N1H1L »

nebula8804 wrote: post #171
FriedPickles wrote: post #38

To further develop the idea of letting EVs go to people who will drive them the most, the true bottleneck is batteries . So, the problem is to get batteries on the road in a way that they will displace the most gas miles as soon as possible. This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), then in a second stage, replace those with full EVs. For most city vehicles…

I mean your logic is sound but car companies dragged their feet for years on even plug in hybrids and so just like the mulled wine example in the article, it wouldn't work in the real world. GM had an amazing things with the Voltec architecture. ~50 miles on electric was more than enough for even the most discerning customers yet they never really extended it past the Chevy Volt. It should have been rolled out to all…

There is also something counter-intuitive - we are making better and cheaper batteries because we are using so many batteries and planning to use _so much_ more. The cost curve and the profit motive are wonderful things.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#178

Post by wumpus »

alexose wrote: post #134
codazoda wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, not being in the industry, I don’t quite understand why. Look at diesel electric locomotives. They run the diesel only for power and they use the electric motors for drive. Why doesn’t this model work in cars and allow us to get rid of the transmission like a full EV does? Gas engines have an optimal RPM. Why wouldn’t a hybrid run the engine at exactly that RPM to generate the best charge? Instead, they are comp…

The only car I know of that works this way is the BMW i3, which came with an optional 'range extender' that's essentially a little gas generator with a 2(!) gallon tank. One complaint I've heard is that it doesn't necessarily put out enough wattage to fully drive the car under certain (hilly, cold) conditions (But, I have to imagine that could be solved with a bigger generator). The problem as I understand it is that…

The purpose of the small gas tank was to qualify for California subsidies and ZEV credits. California doesn't want to subsidize anyone who might buy a PHEV or BEV with REX and then run it 100% on gasoline.

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#179

Post by nojs »

> Each new person who joins a queue goes to the front, standing immediately behind the person being served. This is, of course, an outrage against reason, intuition and natural justice. It is also highly efficient. If you’re next in line to be served, but someone shows up and shoehorns herself into position in front of you, you walk away. The line is only going to get longer, and you’re always going to be at the back.

> Under the Landsburg system, the stalls still serve one seasonal treat a minute

Except what would actually happen is everyone who wants a widget stands around “not in the queue” until the person being served is finished, at which point there’s a mad rush to be the next person served. So basically the same thing that happens when there’s no queue :D

Classic economist solution!

Re: Buy a coal mine, drive a gas guzzler, and other uses of reverse logic

#180

Post by DarylZero »

gpm wrote: post #46
FriedPickles wrote: post #38

To further develop the idea of letting EVs go to people who will drive them the most, the true bottleneck is batteries . So, the problem is to get batteries on the road in a way that they will displace the most gas miles as soon as possible. This suggests a far more effective strategy of first replacing the fleet with plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), then in a second stage, replace those with full EVs. For most city vehicles…

Plug in electric hybrids strike me as insanely complex machines compared to Ev's. It strikes me as highly unlikely that from an environmental standpoint our (societies) time is better spent building them, than it is spent increasing the rate at which we can build batteries.

Such complexity is still cheap to mass manufacture.
Post reply on HN