Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Do you think adoption of EV will be success or failure? Will eventually became replacement for combustion engine car and become mainstream?

There improvement of efficientcy on internal combustion engine seems reach it bottleneck after nearly hundred years of developement,dictated by heat loss and friction between machanical part as there only that much can do to squeeze more power per drop of fuel you burn by adding more complex technology like turbo charge,direct injection,variable valve,hybrid system that increase air to fuel ratio yet the return is diminishing after add on hundreds of complicate part to archive.
EV on other hand is still on early stage of development much more room of improvement to play on many aspect like substitute of battery material with higher energy density,solid state battery or different chemical compound capable hold charge with less eviroment impact.Another problem is the notion of buying ev to offset fuel cost in long run is slap in the face by it car value depreciation which is far worst than ICE counterpart lack of charging infrastructure cause the range anxiety of ev owner had to take every long distance trip with meticulous plan to cross charging station include route ahead.At begining when the first ev is launch i really like EV for it simplicity over ICE but over recent years as it more become popular all the fire accident during charging,hard to extinguish after caugh fire,massive depreciation problem im bit dissapoint with EV yet i really hate complexity modern ICE.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

zonavar68 · 56-60, M
EV's are really nice tech, but they are in no way a pathway to 'net zero' because quite simply net-zero is not possible. Net-zero implies the 'over-arching system' is perfect with no 'losses' and that cannot be achieved.

That means you MUST always have *exactly* the same energy inputs as you have energy outputs with nil losses that cannot be recovered and re-transformed back to the original form of energy used in the system so that means it has to be a fully 100 percent closed system. Because all physical systems are 'lossy' (heat, sound, light, noise, etc. are pretty normal by-products) you always lose energy along the way.

Remember the key thing - energy can neither be created or destroyed - only transformed, And it is that transformation of energy from one form to another (often with multiple steps) where the losses occur.
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
Failure. Electric cars were tried in the early 1900's. Is a waste of money and resourses to reach net zero. What is the goverments record on defeating problems. War on drugs,lost. War on terroism,lost. War against covid,lost.
Zeusdelight · 61-69, M
@MrBrownstone well nothings changed since the early 1900, so we better not try anything at all. What a pessimistic no guts effort.
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
@Zeusdelight You want to try to improve slavery?
Lanyx · 41-45, M
TL,DR.

This electric car thing is a fad. It will die out, and the internal combustion engine will live on.
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@Lanyx Exactly - if you want to charge faster you have to supply more electricity to the charging device, but that's not all. The battery module in the vehicle has to be capable of accepting a higher rate of charge, and the electronics managing the process have to be able to deal with it and all the risks of high-energy flows into inherently dangerous battery cells.

Plus if you have a 1 MW power feed to a bank of 10 chargers, and one car is hooked up, that car might be to get 250 to 350 KW, but if 10 cars are hooked up, the average that each car can get is only 100 KW.

That doesn't take into account losses (I'd average that at 10 percent in total), so a 1 MW feed is typically only 900 KW once all the energy losses are considered, so that's only 90 KW delivered to each of the ten vehicles, and because of those own vehicles electrical losses it could only be putting 80 KW actually into the batteries.

So once the total power capacity of the main feed is reached, the time to charge each connected vehicle goes up. And for the charging site operator, if it gets charged for electricity used on a demand basis, that cost has to get recovered from owners of vehicles that want to charge at that charging operator's sites to make the whole business of running EV charging sites profitable.

Anytime there is a profit motive, someone else has to make a loss, and that's the EV owners getting slugged to cover all the costs of the charging site operator.
Lanyx · 41-45, M
@zonavar68 I have worked in that industry for a year, so I know how it works. By writing 1mW (one milli-watt) I'm assuming you meant to write 1MW (one Mega-watt). The fastest you can charge is 5C: (5x battery capacity, or in 12 minutes. However, this is very, very bad for the battery's health. You then need to worry about thermal management as Lithium batteries can generate a positive feedback loop where heat generates more heat. Once they catch fire, its hyper difficult to extinguish them, as they produce all 3 sides of the fire triangle themselves.

I would recommend charging for 5 hours at 0.2C. 1C is the ampere-hour rating of the battery, and we are talking about current here.
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@Lanyx Yes I'm aware that fires where the lithium battery material is rapidly decomposing due to heat being over about 250 deg C result in the cells feeding the fire with oxygen (and extremely flammable and toxic gases) which is why they burn so hot (2000+ dec C), and cannot be extinguished by smothering.

The only ways to stop the fire are cool it to stop the battery decomposition from happening, or let it burn itself out. I had heard someone mention '5c' in another discussion elsewhere. I was a volunteer firey for 21 years until about 2 years ago and while I had not seen an EV fire I'd seen plenty of normal car fires and they are fairly easy to deal with. At the time we were getting regular training updates about EV fires involving the battery module though.
joe438 · 61-69, M
Battery effiency, cost and toxicity will have to improve tremendously first and you can’t completely rush technology. The lithium stuff we have now doesn’t offer enough range for the cost/weight and it’s extremely bad for the environment.
KingofBones1 · 46-50, M
Evie is not going to kill fossil fuel it just does not have the performance does not have the range and does not have the practical power plants yet necessary for things like aviation or long distance Ocean travel so there will always be fossil fuel to some degree until we find some type of renewable energy that can be self-contained such as nuclear war vessels but on a much smaller and safer scale
Iwillwait · M
I think we will need to look to natural gas conversation kits, much less expensive, or hydrogen powered. The harvesting of Nickel is decimating our natural resources.
Iwillwait · M
@Zeusdelight 🤔Natural Gas it is!
Zeusdelight · 61-69, M
@Iwillwait Well, it would seem unlikely a fossil fuel mined resource could be an answer.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
InHeaven · F
I think they will be forced n mandated too like the other thing was in 2021
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
It will be a big flop. We don't have the infrastructure to get rid of the combustion engine and the amount of money needed to make charging points widely available for people who don't have private drives is going to be astronomical.
The ICE has a lot of things which make it costly.

Some sort of electric vehicles will be successful, but the storage is the issue.
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@KingofBones1 Here in NSW there are now $2200 fines for a non-EV 'blocking' an EV parking space, or for an EV parking in such and not 'plugging in'. I wonder if you can just park an EV in an EV spot, plug it in, but just don't enable charging... Maybe the reverse should apply when EV owners deliberately interfere with non-EV owners accessing fuel, etc.

 
Post Comment