Electrickery is coming. GULP!

[tonupkid]

A long read, but I like stuff like this and thought it might interest others here

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/10...edium=referral

[tintin]

Yup.

[Doodle]

I'm not sure it's Tesla they need to worry about, it's the likes of Hyundai etc.

Model 3 deliveries in the UK are akin to Duke Nukem Forever release dates.

[tintin]

Originally Posted by Doodle

I'm not sure it's Tesla they need to worry about, it's the likes of Hyundai etc.

Model 3 deliveries in the UK are akin to Duke Nukem Forever release dates.

Who cares whether it's Tesla or not? Musk doesn't (really..). Model 3 UK configurations will happen this spring, with deliveries to clear the 18k+ backlogged day 1 reservations in the summer.

[Doodle]

Originally Posted by tintin

with deliveries to clear the 18k+ backlogged day 1 reservations in the summer.

That'll please my colleague, in the time he's been waiting he's seen my Zoe be delivered, driven for 2 and a bit years and handed back to RCI.

[tintin]

Originally Posted by Doodle

That'll please my colleague, in the time he's been waiting he's seen my Zoe be delivered, driven for 2 and a bit years and handed back to RCI.

He should had bought a used Model S while he waited then, like a lot of M3 reservation holders have done: then he would have had the full Tesla experience - useable range n'all

[moltuae]

Interesting article

However, he fails to mention the main challenge facing BEV mass adoption; infrastructure scalability.

Presently the number of BEVs on the road is relatively low, yet I believe queuing for a charging spot at service stations is already becoming quite common. But there's an even bigger problem to address. Even if you can install new charging stations fast enough to keep up with BEV sales, how do you generate enough electricity to keep up with the charging demand of all those vehicles? Considering that to fully charge a BEV probably takes about as much energy as the average home consumes in a single day, unless we can make every charging point self-sufficient, we're probably going to need to double the capacity of the National Grid to get anywhere close to mass adoption.

The problem is, the National Grid is already being pushed to the limit, especially during winter months. If it's to cope with the extra demand, we'll need a LOT more wind farms and power stations, not to mention thousands of miles of extra cables to carry the load. While that's all technically possible, in practice it will cost billions and take several decades to achieve. Generating electricity local to the charging stations is another possibility but, to generate electrical energy on a par with that which is currently provided by fossil fuel-based service stations, every service station would need to invest in biomass generators, wind turbines, solar panels, etc ... which would also require a lot of land.

As much as I like Teslas and believe that BEVs are the future, unfortunately, in the short term at least, I believe HEVs are the way forward. The article suggests that most car manufacturers have 'got it wrong' by focusing on HEVs, citing a trend in which the Prius became "the #1 traded-in car for a Tesla Model 3 in the US". Well that's hardly surprising since most Prius drivers will already be EV-converts, making the Prius a stepping stone in the leap toward BEVs. Also, most car buyers only care about the short-term benefits and the practicalities of owning a BEV right now (or for as long as they plan to own the car at least). But what happens when there are millions more BEVs on the road and long queues at the charging stations? Or worse, what if large-scale BEV adoption leads to power rationing because the power stations can't cope with the demand? If the situation gets bad, we could even see a ban on BEVs and owners rushing to trade them in for HEVs.

In short, I think Teslas are great cars and BEVs are definitely the future but we're not ready for them yet. Maybe in another decade or two. In the short-term, the only practical way towards mass-adoption of EVs is with self-charging hybrid technologies.

[tintin]

Originally Posted by moltuae

Interesting article

However, he fails to mention the main challenge facing BEV mass adoption; infrastructure scalability.

In short, I think Teslas are great cars and BEVs are definitely the future but we're not ready for them yet. Maybe in another decade or two. In the short-term, the only practical way towards mass-adoption of EVs is with self-charging hybrid technologies.

As you might expect Mark, I disagree with that analysis, for several key reasons (apart from the fact that the link is to an article that's nearly 4 years old ).

1. Energy peaks and changing dynamics in usage: as car owners switch to EVs, their modus operandi changes from "fill when you're empty" to "fill when convenient to". Smart technology for EVs helps with this, in lots of ways, from scheduling charging, using mobile apps to guide users to available charge points, accurate monitoring of range, etc, etc. Allied to which most of this energy usage is likely to be off-peak - e.g. overnight, whilst shopping in the evening/weekends, etc. This takes a while for ICE (and new EV!) owners to get their head around, but it happens, eventually.

2. Efficient storage: this in becoming much more common, whether at a local/individual level or at a macro level, and will continue to increase, further diluting the risk of "peak" issues. In addition, we've only just scratched the surface of the idea of using the cars themselves to "load balance" by feeding back into the grid, where required: that might sound far fetched, but is really no different in principle to the FIT approaches used at present.

3. Cabling and infrastructure: Whilst I agree some of this will be needed, it's hardly a showstopper for the grid. If you work on the (reasonable) assumption that a lot of the wind/wave power is remote/coastal, then that tends to be not far from where a lot of our current nuclear sites are - and will continue to be. The same applies to "point of use" infrastructure: if Tesla can install more than 10000 superchargers as a start-up, just imagine what the established players - who actually have some cash - could do.

4. The tipping of the Hydrocarbon vs "Clean Energy" end-to-end value chain: The full cost of the former is rising all the time (including, but not limited to, greater extraction cost - fracking anyone?), whereas the latter is falling exponentially, meaning that the economic tipping point for owners of refuelling has already arrived. In that context, Hybrids make no real sense to own and run, other than that they have been cheaper than "proper" range EVs - until the arrival of the Tesla Model 3/Hyundai Kona/Ionic/etc - which have been quite expensive to buy, though this article: (https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-own-run-study) in today's news quotes a survey that says EVs are already cheaper to own and run.

Hybrids on the other hand are, almost without exception, "compliance" cars designed and built to meet emissions standards/take advantage of tax breaks/mislead naive consumers on fuel efficiency, and are likely - as the article states - to be traded in for the "real thing" once owners get wise to this. This can already be seen in the poor resale values of such vehicles, which are falling almost as quickly as diesel car values in the more advanced car markets. And how is it sensible or efficient to have two forms of propulsion in one vehicle? it's a compromise, and a poor one at that.

So, if I was a betting man, I'd stick with EVs, all the way - sorry Mark.

[MikkiJayne]

I was reading about the new generation of 450KW charging stations recently and it just blew my mind. Most EVs appear to have 400V battery systems, so thats a charge current of over 1000 amps It needs a liquid-cooled connector which is just mental. If that much power escapes it will happily vapourise any inadvertently-connected human and pretty much anything else which is in the way. Its an entirely new paradigm to have that much elastictrickery in the hands of the general public so it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

Also worth pondering - a typical 11KV local substation has a total rating of 1MW, so basically two of those chargers! To put half a dozen of them at a service station, Tesla-style, you'd need a dedicated 132KV industrial supply line and associated (large) substation. Ironically, that might be fine in the countryside where there's plenty of space and you can run new power poles, but getting that sort of juice in cities is going to be a real challenge. Its entirely likely chargers of this type will have to be one-to-a-site simply because there isn't enough infrastructure to support more, which backs up the queues for chargers scenario.

Interesting times

[moltuae]

Originally Posted by tintin

As you might expect Mark, I disagree with that analysis, for several key reasons (apart from the fact that the link is to an article that's nearly 4 years old ).

1. Energy peaks and changing dynamics in usage: as car owners switch to EVs, their modus operandi changes from "fill when you're empty" to "fill when convenient to". Smart technology for EVs helps with this, in lots of ways, from scheduling charging, using mobile apps to guide users to available charge points, accurate monitoring of range, etc, etc. Allied to which most of this energy usage is likely to be off-peak - e.g. overnight, whilst shopping in the evening/weekends, etc. This takes a while for ICE (and new EV!) owners to get their head around, but it happens, eventually.

2. Efficient storage: this in becoming much more common, whether at a local/individual level or at a macro level, and will continue to increase, further diluting the risk of "peak" issues. In addition, we've only just scratched the surface of the idea of using the cars themselves to "load balance" by feeding back into the grid, where required: that might sound far fetched, but is really no different in principle to the FIT approaches used at present.

3. Cabling and infrastructure: Whilst I agree some of this will be needed, it's hardly a showstopper for the grid. If you work on the (reasonable) assumption that a lot of the wind/wave power is remote/coastal, then that tends to be not far from where a lot of our current nuclear sites are - and will continue to be. The same applies to "point of use" infrastructure: if Tesla can install more than 10000 superchargers as a start-up, just imagine what the established players - who actually have some cash - could do.

4. The tipping of the Hydrocarbon vs "Clean Energy" end-to-end value chain: The full cost of the former is rising all the time (including, but not limited to, greater extraction cost - fracking anyone?), whereas the latter is falling exponentially, meaning that the economic tipping point for owners of refuelling has already arrived. In that context, Hybrids make no real sense to own and run, other than that they have been cheaper than "proper" range EVs - until the arrival of the Tesla Model 3/Hyundai Kona/Ionic/etc - which have been quite expensive to buy, though this article: (https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-own-run-study) in today's news quotes a survey that says EVs are already cheaper to own and run.

Hybrids on the other hand are, almost without exception, "compliance" cars designed and built to meet emissions standards/take advantage of tax breaks/mislead naive consumers on fuel efficiency, and are likely - as the article states - to be traded in for the "real thing" once owners get wise to this. This can already be seen in the poor resale values of such vehicles, which are falling almost as quickly as diesel car values in the more advanced car markets. And how is it sensible or efficient to have two forms of propulsion in one vehicle? it's a compromise, and a poor one at that.

So, if I was a betting man, I'd stick with EVs, all the way - sorry Mark.

No need to apologise Stephen. I'm not claiming to have all the facts. Just stating my thoughts on the issue (as I presently see it). I'm a man of science, so I enjoy a good debate. Please do tell me if any of my assumptions are wrong

Off-peak charging is a very good point. I hadn't considered that. But do we have sufficient off-peak energy available? I mean, are we not already offsetting peak usage to some degree with things like 'pumped hydroelectric energy storage'. And incentives such as 'Economy 7', for electricity consumers to use off-peak electricity for storage heaters, etc, must go some way towards balancing the demand. No doubt smart charging systems could take advantage of any remaining dips in demand and store the energy for later use, but will that really be enough? There's also storage efficiency to bear in mind. I don't know how efficient the latest energy storage systems are, but there will always be energy losses in the charging/discharging stages. I would be surprised if they manage any better than around 60-80% efficiency.

The BBC news article about the National Grid capacity is the newest info I could find (with just a quick search) but has the notable downward trend really been reversed in recent years? I suppose the switch to technologies such as LED lighting, for example, will have had some positive effects, but is that enough to offset our increasing use of technology and the energy needed to power it?

I'm very much pro-EV and I really do hope that we can 'make room' for EV charging by making use of off-peak electricity and reducing energy demands in other areas but how do the figures stack up? It would certainly be interesting to see a 5/10 year projection, comparing EV growth and energy requirements vs the available/surplus electrical energy capacity.

I'm confident we can solve all the technical challenges over time, I'm just not sure we can solve them quickly enough to make the leap from ICE to EV as quickly as we perhaps need to, but I remain open to persuasion if there's good evidence to indicate that we have sufficient surplus electrical energy to accommodate the huge demand of charging millions of EVs. In the absence of such evidence my money would still be on hybrid vehicles continuing to bridge the gap in the short-term.

I think one way forward might be hybrid vehicles that use small combustion engines purely to charge the batteries. I drove a brand new Prius recently and I was actually quite surprised how good they are. Ugliness and mini-cab associations aside, they do drive well and, with the help of regenerative braking, they're extremely efficient. The Prius of course sits half way between being an ICE car and and EV, with a small engine supplementing the electric motor and making up for the lack of battery range. They have some of the advantages of both ICE cars and EVs but most of the disadvantages too.

I think it would be better to go full-EV (like the Teslas) but provide a small on-board generator for charging the batteries instead of an engine. Such a generator could run on fuels that are much more environmentally-friendly and it could even be made removable/optional. One way to give the vehicle wider appeal would be to use a removable, modular battery section. If you had say 20% of the battery that was removable, which could be replaced with a generator for those that need/want to be able to charge their batteries on the move. Anyone who doesn't need/want the generator could instead remove it and plug in the battery extension for a greater range.