Toyota is developing a long-range, fast-charging electric car that'll use solid-state...

[captaincranky]

Talk to Uncle Sam, Trump on that one. Was he not complaining campaigning about refurbing infrastructure? Everyone knows that infrastructure needs serious work, but all those in charge seem to be able to do is tell everyone where they can go and take a sh!t. Infrastructure, however, is not generating capacity.

You hafta love your "semantics of convenience". "Generating capacity" is directly tied to "infrastructure", in the form of land set aside for solar and windmills, dams, generators, and the buildings to house them.

Since "Uncle Trump", isn't truly in the business of electric generation, you kind of have to look to the private sector on which to vent your anger and angst.

 

[captaincranky]

Wonderful, any new advance in getting dinojuicers off the road is a Good Thing.

But really, charge in a few minutes? A Tesla takes 1.25 hours to charge from zero to full (not something that people do, actually ... 10% to 85% would be more common).

And those superchargers pump out 120kW+. I don't know what they mean by 'a few minutes', but assuming the same capacity and 1/10th of the time, say 7.5 minutes, you need a 1.2 megawatt charger. The supercharger cables are already about 3 cm thick. The internal wiring to carry that current to the batteries would have to be massive, plus you'd need very sophisticated (and hence expensive) cooling.

There are good technical reasons why it takes 75 minutes to do a full Tesla charge, rather than twice the 20 minutes it takes for a half charge. I doubt it's going to be as easy as portrayed above.

The heat generated when charging a battery is generated by resistive losses, both in the charger, and the battery itself.

So.....(theroetically).... were we able able to reduce the resistive load presented by the battery to the charger, the internal heat created would be reduced.

Plus, I hope Toyota succeeds wildly with their new battery, then refuses to lease it to Tesla, and it puts Tesla out of business.. Very few things would make me happier.(y)

To the downside, scientists aren't totally acerbic and scholarly. The throw as much bull as their employer needs to hear, along with being egomaniacs and publicity hounds.

 

[wiyosaya]

You hafta love your "semantics of convenience". "Generating capacity" is directly tied to "infrastructure", in the form of land set aside for solar and windmills, dams, generators, and the buildings to house them.

Since "Uncle Trump", isn't truly in the business of electric generation, you kind of have to look to the private sector on which to vent your anger and angst.

Ah, Uncle Trump promised infrastructure renovation, and so far, has yet to deliver. Therefore, he gets a pass. I see!

Yes, generating capacity needs infrastructure to deliver; besides protecting places to sh!t, Trump would rather build infrastructure to keep the fantasy threat of Mexican rapist, murders, and, in general, all Mexicans out of the country rather than really spend the money where it would, perhaps, put many Americans back to work and MAGA. I knew he had his priorities straight.

Hmm, I wonder why he has not proposed giving the private sector low or no interest govt guaranteed loans to build/rebuild infrastructure? Oh, that would be socialism even though it would MAGA in ways that the New Berlin Wall never will.

The heat generated when charging a battery is generated by resistive losses, both in the charger, and the battery itself.

So.....(theroetically).... were we able able to reduce the resistive load presented by the battery to the charger, the internal heat created would be reduced.

Plus, I hope Toyota succeeds wildly with their new battery, then refuses to lease it to Tesla, and it puts Tesla out of business.. Very few things would make me happier.(y)

To the downside, scientists aren't totally acerbic and scholarly. The throw as much bull as their employer needs to hear, along with being egomaniacs and publicity hounds.

Theoretically -

For now, as I see it anyway, one thing Toyota has going for it is that they are one of the few businesses that still has a sense of honor and does the right thing. For instance, they initiate their own recalls without NHSTA having to twist its arms like it does with virtually all other automakers. If anyone will come through with something like this, I have confidence that Toyota is, at the very least, capable and also has the mindset to do so.

So far as we know, Tesla, on the other hand, would rather stay in the dark ages than put its money into research.

So, now that the powers that be have secured your public places to sh!t as well as the fact that they are taking steps to deliver us from Mexican evil, perhaps you'll examine the mirrors in front of you and find your own skeletons providing the endless source of crankiness with others. Oh, I forgot, I've got the anger and angst to vent since it is much more convenient to place problems on the shoulders of others rather than face them in one's self.

I am just telling it like it is even though is not the correct side of the PC wall to be on these days.

Who could have imagined that infrastructure could be turned political?

As I see it, only those who thought it would give them a political advantage.

 

[captaincranky]

Ah, Uncle Trump promised infrastructure renovation, and so far, has yet to deliver. Therefore, he gets a pass. I see!...[ ]...

No, Trump isn't getting a pass from me. IMHO, the only thing he has going for him, is that he's not Hilary Clinton.

You can of course, spin my answer any way you see fit. But as I see it, you're really not that pleasant either. In fact, you're probably pissed in that I picked the "Cranky" screen name, before you got here, so it wasn't up for grabs.

In the strict sense "border protection" is in the US Government's jurisdiction. But the wall, and all the attendant nonsense and haggling which is going on about it, in every sense including monetary, is a massive waste of time.

In the stricter sense, "utilities" are private companies sanctioned by our government. A wonderful system, which gave us the "glorious Enron corporation".(y)

Our government does have some electrical generation equipment, independent of the "grid", they're called, "nuclear powered submarines".

Trump did restart the Canada to US pipeline project, and I suppose you'll argue that that's just him, catering to oil barons. Still, that project is in the US government's purview, since it involves an international border, and a treaty with another nation.

So far as we know, Tesla, on the other hand, would rather stay in the dark ages than put its money into research.

Well, Tesla could put money into research, or into Elon Musk's pocket. Why don't you tell us what's going on?

You honestly can't swing a dead cat without hitting some imbecile who thinks they're going to be the emperor of electric cars the day after tomorrow..

So, everything involved with "corporate promises", for me involves when or if it happens. A primary example of that is Intel. If their hype on process width from a few years ago would have come true in the projected time, what would we be on, a 10nm, or a 8nm, process now?.

Apparently, at least with you around, I can't be rooting for Toyota, yet be skeptical of when fulfillment of their promise/goal might occur.

Any recent US government has been a disaster, regardless of the party in power. It's symbolic of a decadent and rapidly decaying entity.

I don't know where you got the idea that I'm on the side of, or campaigned for "bathroom liberty", but you are, badly mistaken.

But at the end of the day, we all know who thinks they could do the best job of running the US government, wonderful Y-O-U.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Get a grip!
Us green people know about a report done by PNNL several years ago already that states that there is enough excess electrical generation capacity in the US to power 85% of all cars and light trucks on the road. We also know that electricity, in comparison to gasoline, is far cleaner and far more efficient.
It is not us green people holding technologies like this back. Crude "drill baby drill" wacos are more likely the ones that are going to have to step aside, or get electrocuted.

I can't tell if your entire post is a joke or if you're just ignorant. Electricity has to be generated from somewhere - it doesn't magically arise out of thin air. In 2015, the vast majority (66%) of electricity in the US is generated by fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, petroleum, etc. So that electricity going into powering EV cars were generated from fossil fuels in the first place. The top non-fossil fuel sources are nuclear and hydroelectric, followed by wind and biomass. "Joke" energy like solar generates 0.6% of the US's energy despite heavy subsidies from the US government and from the Chinese government on the world market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States#Generation

 

[Phr3d]

I can't tell if your entire post is a joke or if you're just ignorant. Electricity has to be generated from somewhere - it doesn't magically arise out of thin air. In 2015, the vast majority (66%) of electricity in the US is generated by fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, petroleum, etc. So that electricity going into powering EV cars were generated from fossil fuels in the first place. The top non-fossil fuel sources are nuclear and hydroelectric, followed by wind and biomass. "Joke" energy like solar generates 0.6% of the US's energy despite heavy subsidies from the US government and from the Chinese government on the world market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States#Generation

"So that electricity going into powering EV cars were generated from fossil fuels in the first place"
stated as fact, when the source of the electricity seems to be your point, and wind and hydro are Not fossil (and a Much Vaster percentage of electricity generation from fossil was the case in the 90's -- and China is subsidizing renewables, Now, because they, earlier, subsidized the creation of cheap coal plants, and Bejing et al are a pretty good indicator of how That worked out -- see also London and the rest of historical stories about what a joy coal was).

you obviously got a kick out of wind production's positive percentage change from '15 to '16 (let alone from '10) in your Own reference material.
Solar is non-joke to communities that can greatly benefit from putting it on their roof, for communities that can Not get that benefit, it is not so appealing (return on investment).
Renewable Are a good thing, it -sounds- as if you are arguing the opposite -- calling people names (ignorant) shows real knowledge and class, btw.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

"So that electricity going into powering EV cars were generated from fossil fuels in the first place", stated as fact, when the source of the electricity seems to be your point, and wind and hydro are Not fossil (and a Much Vaster percentage of electricity generation from fossil was the case in the 60's -- and China is subsidizing renewables, Now, because they, earlier, subsidized the creation of cheap coal plants, and Bejing et al are a pretty good indicator of how That worked out).

you obviously got a kick out of wind production's positive percentage change from '15 to '16 (let alone from '10) in your Own reference material.
Solar is non-joke to communities that can greatly benefit from putting it on their roof, for communities that can Not get that benefit, it is not so appealing (return on investment).
Renewable Are a good thing, it -sounds- as if you are arguing the opposite -- calling people names (ignorant) shows real knowledge and class, btw.

Did you even read the post I replied to? Telling other people to get a grip and calling people wacos isn't "calling people names" according to you? You seem only offended by a post when you personally disagree with its premise.

And solar is a joke when compared to other renewables and in the context of my post -which is mass production of electricity for industrial uses and charging EV cars. I never said wind is a joke - it's far cheaper than solar and offers better returns, but hydro and nuclear are still the best renewables. Renewable is a good thing as long as people stop their love session with impratical ones like solar. Good thing you mentioned China though. The vast majority of their energy comes from coal and they'll be increasing their fossil fuel consumption until at least 2030. But the Chinese do subsidize renewables - but the top two renewables they use are hydro and nuclear. Almost all of their renewable energy comes from nuclear and hydroelectric (thanks to their government controlling all land rights)

 

[Phr3d]

I stand by the 'ignorant' reference, one was wide (anti- 'drill-baby-drill' sentiment) vs personal.
and my comment was to your statement of EV's being (not stated as an absolute, but, perhaps unintentionally, proposed as absolute) "powered from fossil fuels in the first place".
China government sentiment changed drastically and quickly when they had to put up 'closed for the day' signs in Bejing et al. I believe that their subscription to wind is on par with what we are experiencing in the US & UK.
Solar is effortless, at a cost of Space - it works best at the personal & business level (for 35+ years / panel).
Wind requires Maintenance, so it works best at the utility level.
No argument, but that doesn't make solar a joke -- My Very Humble Opinion based upon a decade of hobby-interest in all things renewable and the smile that powering-my-own-car brought to my imagination so many years back (I lived through OPEC I and II, so my mind wanders back to gas lines and economic convulsion). Wind was just as laughable a percentage not so long ago.
regardless, we agree to disagree, cool as far as I am concerned.

 

[captaincranky]

@Bluescreendeath @Phr3d What all the tech heads here never take into consideration, is the fact a whatever renewable energy source(s) we develop, the human race will breed it to under capacity post haste.. Too many people will result in shortages, whether they be actual, or artificially created.

If we run out of oil, and have to depend on other means of production, then the price wars on those energy sources will follow. Granted it won't be OPEC, but it will be some "entity" bleeding the masses dryer than our obsolete & empty oil wells.

So, my name isn't Elon Musk, but I'd be willing to bet I'm just as much a "visionary,". It's just that no one is quite ready to deal with my visions, and they're certainly not ready to deal with my solutions.

 

[mbrowne5061]

....[ ]...Us green people know about a report done by PNNL several years ago already that states that there is enough excess electrical generation capacity in the US to power 85% of all cars and light trucks on the road. We also know that electricity, in comparison to gasoline, is far cleaner and far more efficient.....[ ]....

And yet the power still goes out sometimes on really hot days, when everybody is running their air conditioners. What's up with that?

That has more to do with a combination of temperature, excessive simultaneous demand, and lack of storage built into the grid. Transformers have difficultly operating in high temperature, as do switching stations. When it gets hot out, it gets easier to overload them and knock them offline. Combine that with large draws from all the end-points of the grid simultaneously and you have a recipe for black and brown outs. It's like you have a pulley, and someone all of a sudden yanks on the other end with more leverage. Either the rope slips or breaks. But if you add in a dampening system (energy storage in this case), that is much less likely to happen. We don't need more power plants, per-say, but we do need a way to store electricity generated off-peak hours.

Admittedly, the same thing could still happen with electric cars as people still get home from the evening rush hour and everyone plugs in.

 

[BrianMontanye]

And yet the power still goes out sometimes on really hot days, when everybody is running their air conditioners. What's up with that?

You know, my toaster sometimes burns the bread. Whats up with that? About the same relevance as your comment.

 

[captaincranky]

But if you add in a dampening system (energy storage in this case), that is much less likely to happen. We don't need more power plants, per-say, but we do need a way to store electricity generated off-peak hours..

Well first of all, knowing why it happens, isn't a solution. That said the Pennsylvania Railroad's retired GG1 Electrics have all had their transformers drained, dioxins and all. Yet, oil is a great coolant. I'm pretty sure the step downs on the corner poles are oil filled as well.

Moving back to topic, saying "you need batteries in order to charge batteries", creates yet another substantial obstacle on the path to independence from fossil fuels.. No doubt you're correct, yet it would still create another massive round of tax relief for the wealthy, and more tax and spend politics for the middle class.

Then on top of that, you'd have Trump or his ilk, crowing about the half dozen CEO jobs which were created by the project. (Juh-usstt kidding, (I think))..

I actually thought I was more on point with post #34, (but then I would).

 

[captaincranky]

You know, my toaster sometimes burns the bread. Whats up with that? About the same relevance as your comment.

Think of your Tesla as a glorified toaster, and then trying to charge it during a brown-out.

 

[mbrowne5061]

Well first of all, knowing why it happens, isn't a solution. That said the Pennsylvania Railroad's retired GG1 Electrics have all had their transformers drained, dioxins and all. Yet, oil is a great coolant. I'm pretty sure the step downs on the corner poles are oil filled as well.

Moving back to topic, saying "you need batteries in order to charge batteries", creates yet another substantial obstacle on the path to independence from fossil fuels.. No doubt you're correct, yet it would still create another massive round of tax relief for the wealthy, and more tax and spend politics for the middle class.

Then on top of that, you'd have Trump or his ilk, crowing about the half dozen CEO jobs which were created by the project. (Juh-usstt kidding, (I think))..

I actually thought I was more on point with post #34, (but then I would).

The oil is there to primarily act as a conductor of magnetic flux, not just thermal energy. The oil does help get heat from the switches and transformers to the casing and the radiators on the casing, but mostly it displaces the air that would insulate the two halves of the transformer from one another.

Not batteries, at least not in the chemical sense, but mechanical storage. Reservoirs that are filled and drained, underwater air tanks that are compressed and emptied, flywheels, etc.

 

[thedrelle]

What good is power production if you cant get it to where it needs to be???

It's better than a lack of power production. It's considerably easier to build new higher capacity power lines to get power accross the country than it is to outright build new power plants.

 

[mbrowne5061]

It's better than a lack of power production. It's considerably easier to build new higher capacity power lines to get power accross the country than it is to outright build new power plants.

Easier? Yes. More efficient, both from the energy and economic standpoints? Not a chance. Line loss is a huge concern for the entire energy industry. This is why we build power plants all over the grid, instead of one "super plant" that we just keep expanding as the need grows. IF we ever develop an economically-viable superconductor, its largest buyer will be the companies who build and operate power distribution networks, not some "flying car" company.