Tesla Ride
08-03-2010, 05:37 PM
#31
Drifting
That isn't that bad. What do you get on your car before you need to refuel? I get between 270 and 370 depending on the car I drive and how much I've pushed the tank.
The difference is in the fuel stop. For gas engines, its a quick pour into the tank -done. With an electric charge, it takes more time. There is no mandate that the recharge must take place in the same location every time.
The difference is in the fuel stop. For gas engines, its a quick pour into the tank -done. With an electric charge, it takes more time. There is no mandate that the recharge must take place in the same location every time.
08-03-2010, 05:42 PM
#32
Drifting
08-03-2010, 06:57 PM
#33
Nordschleife Master
That isn't that bad. What do you get on your car before you need to refuel? I get between 270 and 370 depending on the car I drive and how much I've pushed the tank.
The difference is in the fuel stop. For gas engines, its a quick pour into the tank -done. With an electric charge, it takes more time. There is no mandate that the recharge must take place in the same location every time.
The difference is in the fuel stop. For gas engines, its a quick pour into the tank -done. With an electric charge, it takes more time. There is no mandate that the recharge must take place in the same location every time.
08-03-2010, 07:14 PM
#34
The big "miss" in electrics is the carbon footprint required to produce and then charge these beasts. Making batteries is a very dirty business. Shipping components back and forth over the oceans to integration during final assembly requires an incredible amount of good old carbon based fuel. Shift now to recharge power. The U.S hasn't exactly embraced nuclear power generation so that means reliance on fossil fuel based electric power generation. There are currently concerns over the energy required to recharge and power our computers, i-pods and multitude of battery powered "gadgets". Throw electric powered transportation into the mix and you truly have an eco minded devotee's nightmare of unsustainable global energy consumption.
08-03-2010, 07:32 PM
#35
Nordschleife Master
The big "miss" in electrics is the carbon footprint required to produce and then charge these beasts. Making batteries is a very dirty business. Shipping components back and forth over the oceans to integration during final assembly requires an incredible amount of good old carbon based fuel. Shift now to recharge power. The U.S hasn't exactly embraced nuclear power generation so that means reliance on fossil fuel based electric power generation. There are currently concerns over the energy required to recharge and power our computers, i-pods and multitude of battery powered "gadgets". Throw electric powered transportation into the mix and you truly have an eco minded devotee's nightmare of unsustainable global energy consumption.
08-03-2010, 09:11 PM
#36
Three Wheelin'
Most US electricity is generated from coal. So these plug in cars shift the transportation fuel demand to coal from oil.
08-03-2010, 09:35 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
icruze - Thanks for the first-hand report and "fact checking" on the Tesla.
It's amazing, but probably not surprising, how much misinformation is being circulated about the car.
I apologize for regurgitating some of the B.S.
It's amazing, but probably not surprising, how much misinformation is being circulated about the car.
I apologize for regurgitating some of the B.S.
08-04-2010, 12:32 AM
#38
^^^No problem. There is also some misinformation on "greeness" of electric cars posted above, but as I said before, I have no interest in being a poster boy for the green movement so I'll just leave it at that.
Car is not for everyone, but unlike Adias most people don't drive 200+ miles a day so it is truly the only practical electric out there. Obviously the cost limits its appeal, but the new sedan they'll be coming out with (Model S, see below) will be about half the price and have a better range.
Oh, one other negative of the Tesla is that it inspires mediocre rap videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7UzE...layer_embedded
Car is not for everyone, but unlike Adias most people don't drive 200+ miles a day so it is truly the only practical electric out there. Obviously the cost limits its appeal, but the new sedan they'll be coming out with (Model S, see below) will be about half the price and have a better range.
Oh, one other negative of the Tesla is that it inspires mediocre rap videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7UzE...layer_embedded
08-04-2010, 06:30 AM
#39
@ KBS911 wrote:
Well, you can search for any tiny particles of CO2 all over of whatever productions, but do not forget one thing: a gasoline engine have a maximum theoretical efficiency ratio of about 25%, and this, ..at the optimal temp, with the optimal rpm, at the optimal load, and, etc..
So, in average, if you get 15% for real, this is just beautiful.
We can say that one quart of premium 91 is about equal to 10kWh, but when you feed a gasoline engine with one quart of gasoline, not much more than 1.5 kWh is used to accelerate your car, the rest, i.e.: 8.5kWh, does NOTHING else than warming up the planet.
(Also, not forgetting that, when you touch the brakes, the kinetic energy accumulated with this “15%”, ..just go ALL in heat too !!)
Should I add now that a good electric motor can have an efficiency ratio that is close to 99% ??
Well, do not get me wrong, I'm not against gasoline cars, I drive 911 as daily car, and this, since 26 years non stop, but, at least, I get the feeling of what's happen in the "engine" !
Or: As drivers of gasoline based cars, ..I think we should leave the production of batteries in peace, out of critics that looks like mosquitos next to an elephant.
This been said, THANKS A LOT to icruze to have taken the time to post his Tesla feeling for us.
I have not driven a Tesla yet, while living at less than 10 miles of Tesla of Menlo Park, ..and being invited to drive one. I want to do that, and just want to keep a good time for this, as, beside P cars, I also love the Tesla.
I'm pretty sure I will not buy a Roaster, but, ..to my eyes, the Series "S" looks absolutely beautiful !
The big "miss" in electrics is the carbon footprint required to produce and then charge these beasts.
So, in average, if you get 15% for real, this is just beautiful.
We can say that one quart of premium 91 is about equal to 10kWh, but when you feed a gasoline engine with one quart of gasoline, not much more than 1.5 kWh is used to accelerate your car, the rest, i.e.: 8.5kWh, does NOTHING else than warming up the planet.
(Also, not forgetting that, when you touch the brakes, the kinetic energy accumulated with this “15%”, ..just go ALL in heat too !!)
Should I add now that a good electric motor can have an efficiency ratio that is close to 99% ??
Well, do not get me wrong, I'm not against gasoline cars, I drive 911 as daily car, and this, since 26 years non stop, but, at least, I get the feeling of what's happen in the "engine" !
Or: As drivers of gasoline based cars, ..I think we should leave the production of batteries in peace, out of critics that looks like mosquitos next to an elephant.
This been said, THANKS A LOT to icruze to have taken the time to post his Tesla feeling for us.
I have not driven a Tesla yet, while living at less than 10 miles of Tesla of Menlo Park, ..and being invited to drive one. I want to do that, and just want to keep a good time for this, as, beside P cars, I also love the Tesla.
I'm pretty sure I will not buy a Roaster, but, ..to my eyes, the Series "S" looks absolutely beautiful !
08-04-2010, 11:08 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
The "S" exterior looks like a nice marriage of Jaguar and Aston-Martin styling.
Like those wheels, too.
Like those wheels, too.
08-04-2010, 01:53 PM
#41
Nordschleife Master
@ KBS911 wrote:
Well, you can search for any tiny particles of CO2 all over of whatever productions, but do not forget one thing: a gasoline engine have a maximum theoretical efficiency ratio of about 25%, and this, ..at the optimal temp, with the optimal rpm, at the optimal load, and, etc..
So, in average, if you get 15% for real, this is just beautiful.
We can say that one quart of premium 91 is about equal to 10kWh, but when you feed a gasoline engine with one quart of gasoline, not much more than 1.5 kWh is used to accelerate your car, the rest, i.e.: 8.5kWh, does NOTHING else than warming up the planet.
(Also, not forgetting that, when you touch the brakes, the kinetic energy accumulated with this “15%”, ..just go ALL in heat too !!)
Should I add now that a good electric motor can have an efficiency ratio that is close to 99% ??
Well, do not get me wrong, I'm not against gasoline cars, I drive 911 as daily car, and this, since 26 years non stop, but, at least, I get the feeling of what's happen in the "engine" !
Or: As drivers of gasoline based cars, ..I think we should leave the production of batteries in peace, out of critics that looks like mosquitos next to an elephant.
This been said, THANKS A LOT to icruze to have taken the time to post his Tesla feeling for us.
I have not driven a Tesla yet, while living at less than 10 miles of Tesla of Menlo Park, ..and being invited to drive one. I want to do that, and just want to keep a good time for this, as, beside P cars, I also love the Tesla.
I'm pretty sure I will not buy a Roaster, but, ..to my eyes, the Series "S" looks absolutely beautiful !
Well, you can search for any tiny particles of CO2 all over of whatever productions, but do not forget one thing: a gasoline engine have a maximum theoretical efficiency ratio of about 25%, and this, ..at the optimal temp, with the optimal rpm, at the optimal load, and, etc..
So, in average, if you get 15% for real, this is just beautiful.
We can say that one quart of premium 91 is about equal to 10kWh, but when you feed a gasoline engine with one quart of gasoline, not much more than 1.5 kWh is used to accelerate your car, the rest, i.e.: 8.5kWh, does NOTHING else than warming up the planet.
(Also, not forgetting that, when you touch the brakes, the kinetic energy accumulated with this “15%”, ..just go ALL in heat too !!)
Should I add now that a good electric motor can have an efficiency ratio that is close to 99% ??
Well, do not get me wrong, I'm not against gasoline cars, I drive 911 as daily car, and this, since 26 years non stop, but, at least, I get the feeling of what's happen in the "engine" !
Or: As drivers of gasoline based cars, ..I think we should leave the production of batteries in peace, out of critics that looks like mosquitos next to an elephant.
This been said, THANKS A LOT to icruze to have taken the time to post his Tesla feeling for us.
I have not driven a Tesla yet, while living at less than 10 miles of Tesla of Menlo Park, ..and being invited to drive one. I want to do that, and just want to keep a good time for this, as, beside P cars, I also love the Tesla.
I'm pretty sure I will not buy a Roaster, but, ..to my eyes, the Series "S" looks absolutely beautiful !
ICEs are far more efficient that 15%.
Electric motors are far less efficient (far less) than 99%.
08-04-2010, 02:37 PM
#42
Race Director
I did a search on this subject; there is a lot of information out there. Not to get in a p*ssing match but the numbers quoted by GVA-SFO appear to be pretty much in the ballpark. According to a number of annotated sources, the efficiency of the average internal combustion engine is in the range of 18-20% in terms of translating the energy stored in gasoline into motive power to the vehicle. OTOH, the average electric motor is 95% efficient at turning electrical energy to mechanical power. These facts don't seem to be too much in dispute, regardless of political bias either way. Obviously this relates only to the efficiency of the end product, not the relative cost of production of gasoline and electricity, although there are certainly inefficiencies in both. But on the face of it, it seems GVA-SFO's basic assumptions are valid.
08-04-2010, 02:41 PM
#43
Nordschleife Master
I did a search on this subject; there is a lot of information out there. Not to get in a p*ssing match but the numbers quoted by GVA-SFO appear to be pretty much in the ballpark. According to a number of annotated sources, the efficiency of the average internal combustion engine is in the range of 18-20% in terms of translating the energy stored in gasoline into motive power to the vehicle. OTOH, the average electric motor is 95% efficient at turning electrical energy to mechanical power. These facts don't seem to be too much in dispute, regardless of political bias either way. Obviously this relates only to the efficiency of the end product, not the relative cost of production of gasoline and electricity, although there are certainly inefficiencies in both. But on the face of it, it seems GVA-SFO's basic assumptions are valid.
08-04-2010, 05:16 PM
#44
Race Director
The 18-20% figure for the average ICE is a stand alone number; it doesn't include the costs of production for fuel any more than does the the 95% rating for the electric motor include the cost of producing electricity. The figures simply compare the relative inherent efficiency of the two motors, which I think was the point of the OP. In that respect, the electric motor is more than 4 times as efficient, which is a pretty big advantage to throw into the equation as part of the overall cost of production. Doesn't mean I'm giving up my ICE P car. FWIW, just simple facts.
08-04-2010, 05:31 PM
#45
Nordschleife Master
Of course. You'd have to include exploration, production facilities, transportation, storage, and many other costs. Although I'd bet that the total energy cost of producing a gallon of gasoline is as high or higher than the total cost of producing a quantity of electricity with equivelant energy content, I don't have the numbers to prove the point.
The 18-20% figure for the average ICE is a stand alone number; it doesn't include the costs of production for fuel any more than does the the 95% rating for the electric motor include the cost of producing electricity. The figures simply compare the relative inherent efficiency of the two motors, which I think was the point of the OP. In that respect, the electric motor is more than 4 times as efficient, which is a pretty big advantage to throw into the equation as part of the overall cost of production. Doesn't mean I'm giving up my ICE P car. FWIW, just simple facts.
The 18-20% figure for the average ICE is a stand alone number; it doesn't include the costs of production for fuel any more than does the the 95% rating for the electric motor include the cost of producing electricity. The figures simply compare the relative inherent efficiency of the two motors, which I think was the point of the OP. In that respect, the electric motor is more than 4 times as efficient, which is a pretty big advantage to throw into the equation as part of the overall cost of production. Doesn't mean I'm giving up my ICE P car. FWIW, just simple facts.
