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

We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

longreads.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 271 posts

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#131

Post by icebraining »

fooblitzky wrote: post #54
bamans wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a small correction-- Formula E doesn't swap cars anymore, they go the full race distance now, although the distance is much shorter than Formula 1, for example.

I wonder if any electric cars are going to get swappable battery packs? That way you could get an instant recharge, and for racing, it would make battery pack heat manageable by just swapping out the hot pack. It might even provide an advantage over ICE race cars, as fueling is often the lengthiest operation in pit stops.

Tesla already built a Model S with a swappable battery packs, plus a robot that could swap them in 90 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj6LaYFall4

They have given up on that, and there are certainly some problems with the model (for example, what if you own the battery, and they replace it with one in poorer condition?), but other companies are still pursuing it: https://electrek.co/2018/11/01/nio-battery-swap-station-next...

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#132

Post by Tempest1981 »

pier25 wrote: post #62
standardUser wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out the same was true for internal combustion engines all along.

People usually think cars are the biggest sources of emissions but it's not even close. All transportation (car, planes, trains, etc) represent 14% of global emissions. Globally the biggest source of emissions is energy production which represents about 35% (25% of direct emissions and 10% of processes like refining fuel). https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss... So, I doubt emissions from ICE…

I think this was posted/referenced recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1EB1zsxW0k

Gates interview on energy

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#134

Post by wukerplank »

mysterydip wrote: post #88
whenchamenia wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the pre-war cars I have been in or around... only steam had the power to throw you back in the seat. It would be interesting to see a modern multifuel interpretation of one. Might be well suited to long runtimes and alternate fuels.

Not exactly what you asked for, but have you seen BMW's turbosteamer concept? https://newatlas.com/go/4936/

Woah! Never heard of it.

> The long-term development goal is to have a system capable of volume production within ten years.

I guess they canned the project?

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#135

Post by raxxorrax »

godelski wrote: post #129
chadcmulligan wrote: post #121

Some of the reasons why petrol won: There was no electric grid to speak of - even now there is concern the grid can't support all EV's, once you were outside the cities (and there weren't many back then) the grid was spotty. The miracle of being able to pour some cheap liquid in an engine and drive for miles is a considerable achievement. Lead acid batteries weren't very good and were expensive (and still are) and do…

Another reason: Even today the energy density of batteries is SUBSTANTIALLY smaller than that of fossil fuels. [0] We frequently see this graph [1] showing how far batteries have come (they have! and we need to keep going) but not understanding this is part of the issue too. [0] is why we need to keep researching, but [0] is why electric was never going to win in the beginning. It is taking very advanced materials to…

I still think there is a limit in chemical density that cannot be overcome without significantly changing technological principles of current batteries. Maybe hydrogen fuel cells would be a better solution after all if we can find an efficient way to contain it. Easier said than done...

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#136

Post by nostrademons »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #101
aidenn0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with steam is that external combustion tends to be very fuel inefficient compared to internal combustion. This is true in general, but becomes even more true when you constrain the size and weight of the engine.

I am not sure it's less efficient by default or simply because of lack of R&D into making steam engines better. I read about a government program in maybe the 70s (oil crisis?) where steam engines were reviewed to replace gas engines. The reason being is that burning fuel at atmospheric pressure means you burn it more cleanly and fully. This sounds like an efficiency balance at some level, certainly a pollution advan…

You run into Carnot cycle [1] physical limits. The efficiency of any heat engine is bounded by 1 - Tc/Th, i.e. the ratio of the absolute temperatures of the cold reservoir (usually the exhaust gases) to the hot reservoir (combustion temperature). To make an engine more efficient, it needs to run as hot as possible. Non-superheated steam engines are bounded by the boiling point of water (373 C); assuming 21 C outside air, you get a max theoretical efficiency of about 22%. ICEs are typically bounded by the thermal limit of the cylinder material; for iron engines, this gives about 37% efficiency.

Superheated steam or closed-cycle (eg. Stirling) engines can do a lot better than this - Stirling engines can reach 50% efficiency, and this is nearly matched by superheated steam engines as used in power plants. But then you run into weight & safety problems. Superheated steam is great in a nuclear reactor or battleship, but in a car where a crash could easily break the engine piping? You're turning survivable crashes into death traps.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#137

Post by masklinn »

Animats wrote: post #55

* But no sudden technological breakthrough explains the automobile’s arrival in the 1890s either.* Er, steel? Steel was about as exotic as titanium is now until the 1860s when the Bessemer process went into volume production.

And aluminum metal was effectively non-existent until the Hall-Héroult process in the mid 1880.

Literally so until 1824.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#138

Post by gambiting »

raxxorrax wrote: post #135
godelski wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another reason: Even today the energy density of batteries is SUBSTANTIALLY smaller than that of fossil fuels. [0] We frequently see this graph [1] showing how far batteries have come (they have! and we need to keep going) but not understanding this is part of the issue too. [0] is why we need to keep researching, but [0] is why electric was never going to win in the beginning. It is taking very advanced materials to…

I still think there is a limit in chemical density that cannot be overcome without significantly changing technological principles of current batteries. Maybe hydrogen fuel cells would be a better solution after all if we can find an efficient way to contain it. Easier said than done...

Energy density of hydrogen per litre is few orders of magnitude lower than that of petrol. Really the only saving grace of hydrogen vs batteries is the speed of refueling.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#139

Post by amelius »

fragmede wrote: post #125
chadcmulligan wrote: post #121

Some of the reasons why petrol won: There was no electric grid to speak of - even now there is concern the grid can't support all EV's, once you were outside the cities (and there weren't many back then) the grid was spotty. The miracle of being able to pour some cheap liquid in an engine and drive for miles is a considerable achievement. Lead acid batteries weren't very good and were expensive (and still are) and do…

> Its always been possible to make a small electric commuter car to drive round at 30mph for short distances Early models of the Nissan leaf weren't too much more than that (though there have been some advances since the invention of electricity). However, golf carts are the modern version of the small electric car - and is street legal in service jurisdictions! (Okay, technically what's street legal isn't literally…

For short distances you could use a bicycle or scooter instead.

Cars are mostly useful for larger distances, i.e. on highways, where slow vehicles are not allowed.

Re: We Could Have Had Electric Cars from the Beginning

#140

Post by chadcmulligan »

gambiting wrote: post #138
raxxorrax wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think there is a limit in chemical density that cannot be overcome without significantly changing technological principles of current batteries. Maybe hydrogen fuel cells would be a better solution after all if we can find an efficient way to contain it. Easier said than done...

Energy density of hydrogen per litre is few orders of magnitude lower than that of petrol. Really the only saving grace of hydrogen vs batteries is the speed of refueling.

If someone invented a cheap round trip processing method CO2 -> petrol then EV's would have a hard time I suspect
Post reply on HN