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

We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 213 posts

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#201

Post by kelnos »

lstodd wrote: post #139

BTW everyone is fond of Norway while having zero idea how it's actually over there. Consider this movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Order_of_Disappearance The protagonist plows snow for a living, using 200-300 bhp diesel truck for like half a year each year, day after day. This thing just can not be replaced with an electric no matter what you try. And without it there would be zero traffic, electric or no. It o…

There will always be corner cases. That doesn't mean we shouldn't make the common case better.

Not really sure what your comment has to do with the article, though. Seems like you're just here to complain about EV advocacy?

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#202

Post by dhosek »

tim333 wrote: post #159
n0n0n4t0r wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America is now also a dictatorship according to many foreigners (all but russia maybe ).

Working on it but there are still elections scheduled.

Russia, China, Iran and North Korea all have elections too. I don’t know if there’s a single contemporary dictatorship which doesn’t have elections.

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#203

Post by pavon »

skykooler wrote: post #4

A big issue I see with this is that it would necessitate a new fast charging standard, which (due to the extra ground connection) could not be backwards compatible with any existing fast charging standard - rendering it useless for the 40 million electric cars already on the roads worldwide.

Right after we just changed charging standards here in the US. And from what I've heard the cost and time required to run service to a charging station far exceeds the cost of the charging station itself.

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#204

Post by nextaccountic »

L-four wrote: post #92
nextaccountic wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Battery swapping isn't some top-down authoritarian decision made by the CCP and forced into the Chinese society. Nio is just a company that's providing a much needed solution to this problem.

I agree, but there are aggressive subsidies around electric vehicles and general graft. Similar things happen in most countries but in dictatorships things can go to absurd levels when it aligns with the current policy.

Those subsidies can be more easily justified by climate change. Also I don't think they approach the historic, multi-decade subsidies to fossil fuels

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#206

Post by KurSix »

Elixir6419 wrote: post #10

It would be nice if instead of the fast charging problem the focus would be shifted to standardized battery packs, that can be field replaced. I don't really want to own 50-100kwh battery. I just want to use the charge in it and happy to pay for that.

Yet standardization across manufacturers is a huge hurdle... Like every automaker has different battery designs, voltages, and cooling systems optimized for their vehicles. Plus, swapping stations require massive infrastructure investments and a steady supply of charged packs, which means even more logistics and costs.

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#207

Post by KurSix »

skykooler wrote: post #4

A big issue I see with this is that it would necessitate a new fast charging standard, which (due to the extra ground connection) could not be backwards compatible with any existing fast charging standard - rendering it useless for the 40 million electric cars already on the roads worldwide.

Convincing automakers to adopt is never easy

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#208

Post by theshrike79 »

kelnos wrote: post #198
nothercastle wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the power plant has only slightly higher efficiency off the fossil fuels it burns. So you need to use the ev to store excess grid solar generated during the day to truly get an advantage

At least the power plant is burning that fuel and spewing garbage into the air in a place that isn't your home. And power plants capture more of that pollution than cars do, not to mention that many of them burn cleaner fuel than gasoline or diesel. And most people tend to keep their cars for 10+ years. The power grid is changing all the time, and it's likely in the time that you own your EV, the sources it gets powe…

It's also easier to regulate a few dozen power plants to become more efficient and force them to capture more pollution vs. doing that to 100 million cars on the road after the fact.

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#209

Post by KurSix »

mrheosuper wrote: post #59

So the problem is about preventing electric shock. Which is not a new problem at all. Using galvanic isolation is 1 of the solution, but it's expensive. How about using something like RCB to detect mismatch between output current and input current. This is well tested after all

Yet they don't provide the same level of isolation as a transformer-based system.

Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong

#210

Post by KurSix »

stahtops wrote: post #81

This doesn't solve fundamental problems with how America has built its charging infrastructure. We never should have placed hardwired cables on the L2 or L3 chargers. The CCS plugs are broken about 50% of the time? It's a joke. Rented an EV in Europe... the cable is in the trunk! You own it. Take it out, plug it into the charger, plug it into your car. Having a bad day? Drive over the plug? Smash it with a hammer? Do…

Having to carry and connect your own heavy-duty cable every time you charge would be a hassle for a lot of drivers, especially in bad weather or at busy stations
Post reply on HN