We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning • Hacker News Board

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#111

Post by adrianmonk » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:25 AM UTC

> Early electric cars performed better in cities than internal combustion vehicles

This article talks a lot about cars around 1900.

In the US in 1900, 60% of the population lived in rural areas and only 40% lived in cities. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_the_United_Sta...)

So working well in rural areas was probably a more important concern. A product that works OK for all your potential customers is better (from a business's point of view) than one that works a bit better for some customers and not at all for others.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#112

Post by jhoechtl » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:26 AM UTC

axaxs wrote: post #108

Unpopular opinion, but I truly feel battery powered cars are a dead end. Gas won out over earlier models because of its unique properties, most of which is its easy availability and high energy density. Batteries are heavy, and range limited. A true successor to the ICE must offer the same freedoms afforded. Whether it's super fast charging, nuclear, or a greener fuel, though, I'm not sure.

Unpopular but true. The future is either serial electric vehicles SEV or hydrogenium powered cars

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#113

Post by zrm » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:33 AM UTC

mveety wrote: post #105

smileysteve wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we're also omitting the steam car. Where the maintenance and dirtiness were their major detractors, refined fuels and new burners solve these. Steam engines can and could have been refilled at any gas station, could run on any multi fuel including biodiesel. They theoretically require less maintenance, no oil changes, no cooling system. They'd also have had greater range and greater top speed (though less acceleratio…

The acceleration is more of a function of the powertrain design in steam cars. If you replace the direct drive drive train with one similar to a ICE car (ie clutch+transmission) you can get the acceleration of a ICE car in a steam car. If you want to keep the direct drive though you would need to have a larger engine and use hook-up and variable cut-off to keep the efficiency of the smaller engine while cruising. Ste…

> If you want to keep the direct drive though you would need to have a larger engine and use hook-up and variable cut-off to keep the efficiency of the smaller engine while cruising.

An alternative would be to make hybrids. Use an electric motor to get reasonable acceleration and a smaller steam engine for cruising distance.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#114

Post by LeoPanthera » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:39 AM UTC

jhoechtl wrote: post #110

Why would we have had electric car from the beginning? Producing an E-car consumes more energy than a car with an internal combustion engine, the milage is a joke. And if electricity is coming from coal power plants it is all but green.

> Producing an E-car consumes more energy than a car with an internal combustion engine,

That's true! These differences change as soon as the cars are driven. EVs are powered by electricity, which is generally a cleaner energy source than gasoline. Battery electric cars make up for their higher manufacturing emissions within eighteen months of driving — shorter range models can offset the extra emissions within 6 months. Source: https://youtu.be/K9m9WDxmSN8

> the milage is a joke.

The 2019 Tesla model S has a range of 370 miles, and on new superchargers will add 180 miles of range in 15 minutes. Source: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/24/new-tesla-model-s-370-m...

Of course, most EV owners rarely use any charger other than their home one, since you can start every journey with 100% charge.

This might be "a joke" to you, I cannot say.

> And if electricity is coming from coal power plants it is all but green.

That's also true! Lucky then that all electricity does not come from coal power plants. In the US, that's only 17.8%. Source: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/

Those with solar panels on their homes don't get their power from any kind of power plant at all, just the sun.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#115

Post by chrisco255 » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:50 AM UTC

charlieflowers wrote: post #104

jdietrich wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an interesting example of technological synergy at the dawn of the steam engine industry. To build an effective steam engine, you need a precisely ground piston and a precisely bored cylinder, otherwise you can't get useful working pressures. Grinding the piston is laborious but straightforward - you just need two centers and a cutting tool to achieve a rotationally symmetrical part. Boring the cylinder is mu…

Bootstrapping

Dogfooding

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#116

Post by forkandwait » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:56 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #109

axaxs wrote: post #108

Unpopular opinion, but I truly feel battery powered cars are a dead end. Gas won out over earlier models because of its unique properties, most of which is its easy availability and high energy density. Batteries are heavy, and range limited. A true successor to the ICE must offer the same freedoms afforded. Whether it's super fast charging, nuclear, or a greener fuel, though, I'm not sure.

The 2019 Tesla model S has a range of 370 miles, and I assume that as time passes, more EVs will have a range approaching that figure. That range is considerably longer than the range of my bladder, so once charging increases in speed, this "problem" simply vanishes. We're already on our way there, the first 250kW charger opened this week, and will add 180 miles of range in 15 minutes. In fact, it's better than an IC…

How long does it take to charge? Granted 350 miles is a long trip, but some 9f us drive from Seattle to San Francisco and we can't do that in 350 burst waiting overnight for the car to charge.

Personally I think a hybrid that plugs into 120, with a commuting range 50 miles and a back up gas engine will be the sweet spot

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#117

Post by chrisco255 » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 4:58 AM UTC

It's amusing to see people "Monday morning quarterbacking" on one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century. "We could have done it ANOTHER way!" ignores the fact that it might not have happened at all.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#118

Post by axaxs » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 5:09 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #109

axaxs wrote: post #108

Unpopular opinion, but I truly feel battery powered cars are a dead end. Gas won out over earlier models because of its unique properties, most of which is its easy availability and high energy density. Batteries are heavy, and range limited. A true successor to the ICE must offer the same freedoms afforded. Whether it's super fast charging, nuclear, or a greener fuel, though, I'm not sure.

The 2019 Tesla model S has a range of 370 miles, and I assume that as time passes, more EVs will have a range approaching that figure. That range is considerably longer than the range of my bladder, so once charging increases in speed, this "problem" simply vanishes. We're already on our way there, the first 250kW charger opened this week, and will add 180 miles of range in 15 minutes. In fact, it's better than an IC…

And Monday, I have a 900 mile drive to make (true story). Compare the time it would take me in a gasoline car vs a Tesla.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#119

Post by LeoPanthera » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 5:14 AM UTC

axaxs wrote: post #118

LeoPanthera wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2019 Tesla model S has a range of 370 miles, and I assume that as time passes, more EVs will have a range approaching that figure. That range is considerably longer than the range of my bladder, so once charging increases in speed, this "problem" simply vanishes. We're already on our way there, the first 250kW charger opened this week, and will add 180 miles of range in 15 minutes. In fact, it's better than an IC…

And Monday, I have a 900 mile drive to make (true story). Compare the time it would take me in a gasoline car vs a Tesla.

Very long journeys will involve charging stops, yes. But "I have to make a long journey next week" does not validate "EVs are a dead-end technology".

PS. You can use abetterrouteplanner.com to find out exactly how many charging stops you would have to make on any arbitrary journey.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#120

Post by jcranmer » Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 5:16 AM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #84

graycat wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC basic thermodynamics shows that ordinary steam engines can't be very efficient. So, don't get good MPG or miles per bucket of coal, or whatever fuel. IIRC the main reason for diesel-electric locomotives for trains and large ships was that it was significantly more efficient than just steam, at least steam with just a boiler and pistons. Of course, really large ships generate steam and then run it through a steam…

For trains diesel electric lets you really simplify the power-train. Imagine powering all those wheels mechanically, yeah, not happening.

The most common diesel-electric locomotive today has 6 drive axles. The big steam locomotives designed at their twilight sported 6-10 drive axles, and the most famous and successful of them (the 4-8-8-4 Big Boy) ran 8 drive axles. Mechanical linkage of drive axles isn't what killed the steam locomotive.