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

Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 328 posts

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#281

Post by freemint »

kortex wrote: post #249
hattmall wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not electrify the road, at least highways, in part.

How? Rail at least provides a direct conductive path. Electrified highways would require inductive charging at 65mph (not feasible) or building overhead pantograph systems (expensive but at least vaguely tractable). Either requires specialized vehicles. Europe could pull it off due to its density, but the stretches of American highway which would benefit the most from it, would be a huge challenge.

You do not conduct your electricity over the rails you drive on. Even with trains it's overhead wires. The same principle has been demonstrated to work on (small parts of) the Autobahn. All it requires is a dedicated lane where trucks could tap into overhead wires.

https://youtu.be/UB298IXBvtU

https://youtu.be/m6x9Y5YElxk

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#282

Post by freemint »

b112 wrote: post #122
martin_bech wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the infrastructure needed would be bonkers, and creating fuelibg stations is not really a solved problem. You also loose a big amount of energy converting from electric to hydrogen and back. The cars themselves almost always have low storage because the tanks are very big. Hydrogen car performance is also a lot lower then pure EV.

Why do peopke always ignore the range, and specs, of the three separate car brand's H2 range, when making claims like this? You're wrong. And claims of energy loss!! Sure, no loss to heat in batteries? And batteries lose charge if they sit idle!

There is some loss in batteries but like we can measure things and hydrogen comes out way short in terms for miles driven per kWh of electricity in the grid.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#283

Post by freemint »

MerelyMortal wrote: post #104
nl wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't realised until very recently that most hydrogen produced comes from coal: https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/explain... Most of the time it isn't a green fuel at all and is just a way to keep mining coal.

Electrolysis powered by nuclear energy seems very clean and green to me. With the added benefit of not requiring an overhaul of the electrical grid to be able to handle everyone charging their cars.

It might be green jut it is super expensive and not very green for the decade it takes to build a plant.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#284

Post by freemint »

tokamak-teapot wrote: post #20
cjdell wrote: post #13

I'm not sure why we aren't making EVs with small but upgradeable batteries. Like for example a $20k car with a 10kWh "good enough for now" starter battery that can be bought today. Still good enough for 90% of trips and upgradable to 50kWh with additional after market battery modules should the user decide. As simple as upgrading the RAM on an (old) laptop.

I’d love a car with a tiny battery for 99% of the time when I’m just driving locally and the ability to have an extra, large battery that can be slotted in when I want to make a longer trip. With only the short range battery most of the time, my car’s weight is low and efficiency high. Maybe I could keep that battery in my house and use it to store solar electricity most of the time. It seems like it should be possib…

Look into the XBUS by Electric Brands. It is a light vehicle (because they are a less stringently regulated market in Europe).

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#285

Post by freemint »

carapace wrote: post #246

To me it seems that batteries in EVs make less sense than e.g. alcohol fuel ICE or hybrids. The main consideration is energy density, but alcohol is easy to make and handle, carbon-neutral, and the exhaust is non-toxic. This wouldn't make sense for the whole of car traffic because we use way too much fossil fuel to replace it all with e.g. industrial ethanol. But it could work as part of a transitional strategy. Fuel…

Alcohol is not really carbon neutral. Plants don't produce alcohol. They produce sugar. The farming and transport also produces emissions and you lose a ton of energy on the way.

C6H12O6 (Sugar) -(Enzymes)-> 2C2H5OH (Alcohol) + 2CO2 (Carbon Dioxide)

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#286

Post by [deleted] »

freemint wrote: post #281
kortex wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Rail at least provides a direct conductive path. Electrified highways would require inductive charging at 65mph (not feasible) or building overhead pantograph systems (expensive but at least vaguely tractable). Either requires specialized vehicles. Europe could pull it off due to its density, but the stretches of American highway which would benefit the most from it, would be a huge challenge.

You do not conduct your electricity over the rails you drive on. Even with trains it's overhead wires. The same principle has been demonstrated to work on (small parts of) the Autobahn. All it requires is a dedicated lane where trucks could tap into overhead wires. https://youtu.be/UB298IXBvtU https://youtu.be/m6x9Y5YElxk

[deleted]

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#287

Post by rasz »

NickRandom wrote: post #108
bell-cot wrote: post #67

> Automotive giant Ford is shoring up its battery supply chain — partly by importing lower-cost, iron-based batteries popular in China — as it sprints to increase electric vehicle production. Old geezer's perspective: Back in its heyday, Ford Motor was one of the most vertically integrated (large manufacturing) companies in the world. They owned and operated their own fleet of ore carriers (cargo ships), to haul iron…

And of course as a further example of their supply chain integration no conversation on it would be complete without mention of Fordlandia [1][2] [1] Lost cities #10: Fordlandia – the failure of Henry Ford's utopian city in the Amazon https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/aug/19/lost-cities-1... [2] Wikipedia Entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordlandia

One hour podcast: Fordlandia: America In Brazil (RCR Car Stories) - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN5JjScdB3g

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#288

Post by fomine3 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #109
MerelyMortal wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The infrastructure needed to create a power grid for people to charge electric vehicles at home would be double-bonkers. Upgrading fueling stations seems much easier than mining all of the copper needed to add all of the extra lines for EV charging, and then upgrading the whole national grid. Supposedly one company has claimed 95% efficiency on creating hydrogen from electrolysis: https://newatlas.com/energy/hysata-e…

There are ancillary benefits to upgrading the grid that retrofitting pipes to pump hydrogen doesn’t bring. Most of America and Europe would do just fine without upgrades, for most of the population. And the jurisdictions touting hydrogen ( e.g. Japan) have 70s-era anti-nuke greens in power. Hydrogen is a smart hedge to pursue. But thank goodness it’s mostly Japanese tax dollars doing it.

Current Japan regime isn't anti-nuclear but they are the regime that encouraged nuclear plants. Now nuclear is unpopular for obvious reason so the regime is struggling about future energy plan. Thanks (/s) to putin, nuclear is now re-evaluating. I feel Germans are more anti-nuclear.

Why Japan encourages hydrogen is not very related to nuclear (except that the gov want to feed jobs to heavy industry companies that worked on nuclear), but related to lack of every local materials/fuels. I think hydrogen research should be encouraged, but Toyota should release more PHEV/BEVs early.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#289

Post by fomine3 »

MerelyMortal wrote: post #104
nl wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't realised until very recently that most hydrogen produced comes from coal: https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/explain... Most of the time it isn't a green fuel at all and is just a way to keep mining coal.

Electrolysis powered by nuclear energy seems very clean and green to me. With the added benefit of not requiring an overhaul of the electrical grid to be able to handle everyone charging their cars.

Producing hydrogen directly from nuclear plant is being developed. https://www.iaea.org/topics/non-electric-applications/nuclea...

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#290

Post by gamblor956 »

electrondood wrote: post #245
dylan604 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They're incredibly late to the EV game; considering that they're doing remarkably well. When you're not the trailblazer, it's easy to make catch-up progress to those that went before you in much much less time. Why this is constantly a source of amazement is funny to me. By the time Ford got involved, the path was no longer a beaten down path, it was fully paved 8-lane highway. Instead trying to figure out how to ma…

> While Tesla is "working" on self-driving and not doing well with it Maybe you missed the footage of FSD perfectly navigating San Francisco during rush hour [1]. I'd say they're doing pretty damn well. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh8AV3OMWYs

You must have missed the news reports today of a self driving Tesla running into a motorcycle and killing the rider because AP didn't "see" it.
Post reply on HN