Joined
·
4,085 Posts
The link points to
Inductive Charging is not a very efficient method of recharging the batteries.
That's been my experience too.JoeReal,
Be careful, Texas always want you to do his work for him, then he will apply some abstract metric, instead of overall feasibility, to declare your approach not just inferior, but completely unacceptable.
You mean abstract metrics like numbers, calculations and efficiency analysis? If that's what you mean then I'm guilty as charged. I think when we look back in a few years and read our posts you will finally see the light. Ever hear the saying, "follow the money"? well I say, "follow the energy". Many of the things you two bring up just don't make sense in terms of efficiencies and competition with other solutions. I can't change your minds so I say let's wait and see. Here is a short list of thoughts:That's been my experience too.
No need to go past this statement, as you simply don't understand mine. You can have hard numbers on insignficant or abstract metrics like efficiency, but if you exclude upfront capital costs, then you ignore those things that consumers use to select winners in the marketplace.You mean abstract metrics like numbers, calculations and efficiency analysis?
I hope by "you two", you don't mean me and Jason, because Jason and I disagree on many, many things. What you meant to say was, "don't make sense to me". Because, Texas, you aren't the final authority on what makes sense.You mean abstract metrics like numbers, calculations and efficiency analysis? If that's what you mean then I'm guilty as charged. I think when we look back in a few years and read our posts you will finally see the light. Ever hear the saying, "follow the money"? well I say, "follow the energy". Many of the things you two bring up just don't make sense in terms of efficiencies and competition with other solutions. I can't change your minds so I say let's wait and see. Here is a short list of thoughts:
1) The BEV will beat the hydrogen passenger car in the market place.
2) The compressed air motor will never be practical compared to other solutions.
3) Drilling in ANWAR is useless. A pimple worth of oil.
4) Nuclear fission is a non-renewable waste of time and money.
5) Drilling our coastline will take a long time and will do nothing to change the price of gas or reverse our addiction to foreign oil.
6) Solar and wind with pumped storage hydro is the best solution for our energy crisis. If another electrical storage system becomes available that is better and cheaper than pumped storage hydro then great! When that happens I'll change my position. I don't expect to have to for a long time.
7) We are at or very near peak oil. Get over it.
8) We Americans will need significantly more pain before we change in any significant way. No pain, no change.
Well, I think that's enough for now. What about you two? What is your vision of the future?
I think the point about the up-front costs is really important, because many, if not all, of the things we need for a sustainable energy infrastructure (wind, PV, solar-thermal, geothermal, energy storage, EV's, PHEV's) all require high up-front capital costs. I think we all agree on the goal of a sustainable energy infrastructure, but what is the best way to overcome the hurdle of the high capital costs?No need to go past this statement, as you simply don't understand mine. You can have hard numbers on insignficant or abstract metrics like efficiency, but if you exclude upfront capital costs, then you ignore those things that consumers use to select winners in the marketplace.
Yes, batteries are more efficient, but the Air Car, and now the fuel cell are now cheaper than battery packs. Certainly, there is a cross-over point after 5, 10, 20 years of driving where it would have been cheaper to have paid for the batteries upfront, but most people don't have that much money laying around, and can't afford the interest on a loan, so they opt for low upfront costs, and more expensive fuel.
So maybe you can tell all us why GM and Toyota stopped going with the inductive charging method and the Honda and Ford conductive charger won out. Clearly, the inductive is superior, unless your not telling everyone here the full story.Please give us references to your statement. The only losses are heat and heat losses are always there. Induction is used throughout our electrical grid with very low losses. I think you pulled that out of your butt. Sorry.
I hope by "you two", you don't mean me and Jason, because Jason and I disagree on many, many things. What you meant to say was, "don't make sense to me". Because, Texas, you aren't the final authority on what makes sense.
Most inductors used in the grid are efficient, but the one illustrated in the car is not. Particularly, it is not in an enclosed system. There are too many wayward magnetic fields that are open to losses as opposed to a completely enclosed system. Even if I pulled that one out of my butt, it has much more credentials than you think, sorry!Please give us references to your statement. The only losses are heat and heat losses are always there. Induction is used throughout our electrical grid with very low losses. I think you pulled that out of your butt. Sorry.
Swapping batteries? Induction charging all over the place? Let's see, we know it takes about a 16kwh battery to go 40 miles and that battery weighs 400 lbs. That battery ain't swapping all that fast. Think of all the cars you now see at a filling station on a busy day. Now think of all the fancy robotic/hydraulic equipment needed to service those cars in a timely fashion. Add to that all the spare batteries that the station owner would have to keep on hand to anticipate demand and how much space, power and expense that would be for that person. Until batteries get much, much better power density, this solution just isn't one.
Induction charging would require a lot of infrastructure modification and a whole lot more demand on the grid. Neat idea, charge your car as you go or where ever you park with no hassle to the driver. Only problem is, it's a chicken and the egg thing. Nobody is going to spend the huge piles of cash needed to install this equipment until there is a proven demand. There's not going to be any demand because without this system in place, EVs will have to use some other type of charging system. I don't know about the towns you guys live in, but mine can't even manage to keep up with the pot holes much less install charging pads and stations all over town.
A better place indeed. So is Shangri-La. The solution lies with reinventing the automobile, not reinventing the whole transportation system.