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

Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

keck.usc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 661 posts

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#441

Post by margalabargala »

Rygian wrote: post #353
margalabargala wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EVs can coast too EVs could coast if a manufacturer chose to make one that allowed that without shifting into neutral. In practice, when letting off the accelerator, existing EVs will instead regen brake.

People driving an EV learn, in a matter of minutes, to coast by just applying the right amount of pressure on the "gas" pedal.

They learn to sort of coast. The car feels like it's coasting. Sure.

Next time you do this keep an eye on the actual power readout. See if it's actually zero or if it's reporting ~3kW of braking or accelerating.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#442

Post by pirate787 »

grosswait wrote: post #437
_bent wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you still have tyre rubber, which is a major source of microplastics

And not a distinguishing factor of ICE vehicles

EV have far more tire wear because they are heavier and also probably from regenerative braking

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#443

Post by thfuran »

pirate787 wrote: post #442
grosswait wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not a distinguishing factor of ICE vehicles

EV have far more tire wear because they are heavier and also probably from regenerative braking

Why would regenerative braking emit more particulates? It’s no harder on tires than braking mechanically but doesn’t abrade the pads or rotors.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#444

Post by bluGill »

DaSHacka wrote: post #133
sagarm wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backup cameras are an enormous safety improvement. Plus touchscreens are much cheaper than buttons and knobs.

> Backup cameras are an enormous safety improvement. Sure, however.... > Plus touchscreens are much cheaper than buttons and knobs. And how much LESS safe is using a touchscreen while operating a motor vehicle? Its literally no different from using an iPad.

There are large implementation differences in touch screens. My wife's care needs several second: turn the radio on, wait for the splash screen, press the drives heat control, wait for it to appear (100s of ms - long enough to notice) then find the button in the miedle of the screen - finally I can change the heated seats. My car that button is always has the button at the bottom of the screen in the same place so is is ms to look and see.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#445

Post by margalabargala »

stahtops wrote: post #436
margalabargala wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. I'm aware. The point I'm making is that EVs apply more braking than ICE vehicles do, due to the specifics of the implementation of regen braking that all manufacturers have chosen. > You can coast in EV as well Not without literally putting it in neutral. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amo…

Plenty of ICE cars let you control the transmission, and not just MT. Engine braking is effectively the same as regen braking to tires. Regen is lossy, so there’s no incentive in slowing down to capture 1W just to speed up and spend 1.1W Porsche has modes for coast and regen. Applying brakes in coast mode will use regen up to a threshold and then use conventional pad/rotor. So I am sorry to inform you that you’re jus…

You make a fair point that engine braking is not dissimilar. However the impact of engine braking is orders of magnitude smaller.

The reason to capture 1W and then spend 1.1W is it keeps you at a consistent speed. That's why manufacturers do it.

Lots of people in these comments who have never actually driven an EV while looking at the energy usage readout.

Personally I've never driven a Porsche but I've driven EVs from Nissan, Tesla, VW, Chevrolet, Kia, and Hyundai and they all do this.

So I am here to inform you that you are just wrong. There's no need to be sorry about educating someone, though, don't apologise next time :-)

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#446

Post by MBCook »

magicalhippo wrote: post #220
MBCook wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they? I was under the impression most EVs cut off the connection to the high voltage battery almost all the time they’re not in use. They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car. The only thing I’m aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose.

> They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car. Which leads to "fun" situations when that battery runs out, like not being able to get into your car or start it. However not much power is needed, so a tiny portable jump pack is enough to get things going. Both me and my sister has experienced this, me a Nissan Leaf and her a VW ID.4, good times.

I have too. Mach-E.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#447

Post by bluGill »

flakeoil wrote: post #408
bruce511 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both ICE and EV cars require a support infrastructure. As sales trends change, so the emphasis on support infrastructure changes, and that accelerates the trend. For example EVs depend on charging, so we're seeing more public charge points, as well as more home chargers, work chargers and so on. ICE depends on gas stations (which is the tip of the gasoline distribution industry.) It also depends on ICE mechanics. As…

> But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared. I'm guessing it will be already in 20-30 years from now. In 5-10 years from now, no-one will buy an ICE vehicle. Add to those 10 years a lifetime of 10-20 years for the last sold ICE vehicle and you get 20-30 years. So 20-30 years from today there will not be many ICE cars rolling on the streets and most gas stations and other needed infra…

The average car is 12 years old (us, but other countries are similar). so gas stations are likely still common in 20 years. in 10 years new gas stations will be built a lot less often, but nobody will close an existing one that they wouldn't close anyway.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#448

Post by sagarm »

stephenr wrote: post #362
sagarm wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I responded to a comment about screens.

You don't need 'dual 12.3" touch screens' for a reversing camera.

I should have mentioned a digital dashboard is also cheaper than a traditional one, I guess. But isn't that obvious?

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#449

Post by MBCook »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #169
princevegeta89 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that was what I meant - the battery pack meaning the entire system of batteries, be it 1 or 2 or 3. That really enables them to have a continuous state of power supply for a long long time. This cannot be achieved by ICE cars and not even hybrids for that matter.

In theory. In practice, a lot of EVs (and hybrids, which could do the same thing to a more limited extent) ship with the same cheap flooded lead acid 12v batteries that ship with ICE cars and don't handle constant charging/discharging well. This puts a cap on how much the "smart" systems can do because it dramatically increases cycle count and thus the risk of the 12v battery losing the ability to produce enough volt…

My EV also has an extra-tiny 12V battery because it doesn’t need to crank anything over.

So extra drain would be an extra big problem.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#450

Post by drzaiusx11 »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #416
drzaiusx11 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oil in the exhaust in quantities high enough to produce acrid white smoke is extremely common on a number of ICE engines, like blown head gaskets on E25s (found in most Subarus before their Toyota involvement in 2010) for example

Subarus with bad head gaskets leak combustion gas into the cooling system displacing the coolant. If you run a flat engine low on coolant it will score the upper cylinder walls and the you will have oil consumption. This is fundamental to all flat engines. Oil in the exhaust is blue smoke. Coolant is white.

I never got the "blue" and "white" thing. Both look "white" to me, but you're right about subarus also leaking coolant in the exhaust which is easily identified by a "sweet" smell. Blown gaskets on ICE engines like E25s leak both oil AND coolant, no? I might be mixing up blown heads with cracked manifolds which often go hand in hand since temp extremes in engines fissure cast parts like the manifold. Either way the end result is the same: noxious fumes in the exhaust.
Post reply on HN