The Historically Accurate EV discussion

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

I million K in 5 years odd .
That is over 300 miles every single day .
And 10 or 12 full charges every week which could only be done with high rate chargers .
And the 150,000 miles battery guarantee only covers if you do not do too many supercharger charges .
So how many sets of batteries has it had . £50,000 or £100,000 worth .


Or is the whole story just more of Autocars bovine scatology to try to promote EVs .

I know you appreciate a myth-busting version of a story.

Tesla Model S busts EV myths with historic 1 million kilometres driven
It has not been all smooth driving, however. Built in 2013, the Model S is now onto its second battery and fourth motor.

It has been the fourth motor that has held up to the pressure of what at times has been 1,000 kilometre drives for days at a time, covering 680,000km – more than two-thirds of the total 1 million kilometres.

It’s second battery – for which Gemmingen says in a Youtube video prior to the historic moment (shared below) he had to wait six months, driving with a loan battery until Tesla could replace it with a replacement battery – has covered half of the distance at 500,000km, Gemmingen says.



Tesla Model S reaches 1 million km milestone in historic 5-year-run
The Tesla Model S P85 driven by Gemmingen has experienced its own fair share of challenges on its way towards the 1 million km milestone. Over the course of five years, the vehicle had required a battery change at 470,000 km. Three electric motors were worn out over the journey as well. Fortunately, Gemmingen noted that most of these issues were covered by the Model S’ warranty, and thus, maintenance costs of the vehicle were still very little.

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I know you appreciate a myth-busting version of a story.

Tesla Model S busts EV myths with historic 1 million kilometres driven
It has not been all smooth driving, however. Built in 2013, the Model S is now onto its second battery and fourth motor.

It has been the fourth motor that has held up to the pressure of what at times has been 1,000 kilometre drives for days at a time, covering 680,000km – more than two-thirds of the total 1 million kilometres.

It’s second battery – for which Gemmingen says in a Youtube video prior to the historic moment (shared below) he had to wait six months, driving with a loan battery until Tesla could replace it with a replacement battery – has covered half of the distance at 500,000km, Gemmingen says.



Tesla Model S reaches 1 million km milestone in historic 5-year-run
The Tesla Model S P85 driven by Gemmingen has experienced its own fair share of challenges on its way towards the 1 million km milestone. Over the course of five years, the vehicle had required a battery change at 470,000 km. Three electric motors were worn out over the journey as well. Fortunately, Gemmingen noted that most of these issues were covered by the Model S’ warranty, and thus, maintenance costs of the vehicle were still very little.

As Tesla,s battery life Guarantee are only 8 years OR 150,000 miles , which ever comes first .
https://www.tesla.com/support/vehicle-warranty
Then he has been very lucky to have tens of thousands of £ s worth
of replacements done for him .
Or this story is not quite true & is just another advertising blurb for Tesla & EVs

[S griffin]

I think 8 years is a good deal, it’s not like it’s taken over the world yet. Maybe that guy did get a good lot of repairs out of it. It might be only part true, I can’t see anything suggesting it’s just PR to be fair, as much as they need to advertise their product where they can

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

As Tesla,s battery life Guarantee are only 8 years OR 150,000 miles , which ever comes first .
https://www.tesla.com/support/vehicle-warranty
Then he has been very lucky to have tens of thousands of £ s worth
of replacements done for him .
Or this story is not quite true & is just another advertising blurb for Tesla & EVs

In 2014, as part of their promotion, Tesla were offering infinite mileage warranties on batteries.
https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/infinite-mile-warranty

Is it advertising blurb? Maybe. But then Tesla are not the first in the world to promote a vehicle that has covered an excessive amount of miles.

As to the validity - 'And bust myths he has now done, crossing the 1 million kilometre mark under the watchful eyes of a representative from the Guinness Book of Records to ascertain if the milestone moment does in fact constitute a first by one electric vehicle.'

The issues he experienced in the first few years were common faults across all Model S's.
The issues with the drive unit were all but eliminated when they modified the production line to robotic greasing as opposed to manual.
The second battery has covered 680,000 km. How many people buy a car today expecting to drive it for more than 300,000km over its entire life?

[S griffin]

That was all back then, I guess they needed something to promote something new. They needed to advertise in what is a tough market. They were up against proven products. But they are slowly getting there and they have that certificate to prove they have done something remarkable.

Tesla have done well against stiff competition. Of course as I said they haven’t taken over the world yet, but they’ve found their own place in a ruthless car market

[crmalcolm]

GM has joined the list of manufacturers confident of developing batteries with a million mile life.
Also looking at EVs with 500-600 mile range.

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/05/23...00-mile-range/

[Gerard C]

I dont know what to think about the new Tesla system, mainly a two way charger, allowing the car owner to send back some energy on line and get money from. What is the interest behind this?

[crmalcolm]

MIT are suggesting that used EV batteries may have value in use as grid storage...

http://news.mit.edu/2020/solar-energ...ries-life-0522

[crmalcolm]

Rumours are growing that, as part of Renault's overhaul, the historic Alpine brand may become a full-EV marque.

'Renault Group design chief Laurens van den Acker said “it’s inevitable that we’ll electrify Alpine” in the future. While that is in part due to the need to meet increasingly tougher emissions, he added: “We’re not only doing it because of the regulations. People’s expectations will shift and will push us into this direction.”'

[Gerard C]

People expectations? What do they really know about their future clients? What could be historically correct would be to bring back the Dauphine Henney Kilowatt. With more powa suggest to call it Dauphine Gordini Survoltée!

[John Elwin]

On the subject of the Alpine A110, the fairly detailed press release from Renault this morning concerning future plans simply says the following:

"Open reflection on the reconversion of the Dieppe plant at the end of the production of the Alpine A110."

I suspect something may have got lost in the translation from French, but there is no mention of electrification there. However, elsewhere it says the Douai and Maubeuge plants are likely to become centres of electric production.

[Gerard C]

Its all about politics and relationship with the major unions. le virus a le dos large, il sert Ã* masquer les licenciements nécessaires. And dont forget Renault to be asked to move forward quickly in the new EV's field. By the press' herself. Renault already got a lot of money from the gov' (Peugeot as well). Both illegally imo. Now they hide themselves behind the Dacia banner. And after that they wonder why people want to buy a Toy'!

[crmalcolm]

Predictions are emerging that the charging times for EVs could be dropping significantly in the next five years, if the right charging technology is adopted.

'in five years it should be possible to ultra-rapid-charge even a high-capacity EV battery en route in under 10 minutes'

When this materialises, it should go some way towards eliminating range-anxiety.

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Predictions are emerging that the charging times for EVs could be dropping significantly in the next five years, if the right charging technology is adopted.

'in five years it should be possible to ultra-rapid-charge even a high-capacity EV battery en route in under 10 minutes'

When this materialises, it should go some way towards eliminating range-anxiety.

More pie in the sky .Autocar seems desperate to promote EVs.
Higher voltage charging stations would , in nearly all cases , require a new electric sub station . Which is why the Porsche is spending Millions on theirs .
Approx £300,000 per charging station .
And there is still not enough capacity in the grid .
The higher the charge rate , the less cars can be done at any one time .So , for your 10 minute charge , you might have to wait hours .

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

Approx £300,000 per charging station .

How does that compare to the cost of building a petrol station?

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

How does that compare to the cost of building a petrol station?

I was not aware that lots of new petrol stations were being built .
But that cost is for upgrading the sub station .
Porsche are saying that they will spend Billions on upgraded charging stations around the world .
Where is that money coming from ?
Is it like Tesla ,[ who have never made a profit in any year since they have been going ] , but get a Green subsidy from any Government , [ IE taxpayer ] , who will pay them .
And one of the " Future Energy Scenarios " for the UK quoted £350 Million for extra EV charging points around the country .
So , unlike Petrol stations which are paid for by fuel companies , it seems all of the EV use , [ cost of the cars & charging ,] is going to be subsidised by the tax payer .

PS . A lot of large motorway service stations have the capacity for about 6 50KW chargers .
If they changed to your super charger for a 10 minute fill up , then the max they could have would be 1 unit .

[St Eval]

Why does it have to be an EV running from the grid? Why not Hydrogen EV or Hydrogen combustion? No need for much change to infrastructure except for Hydrogen storage. Natural gas and zero pollution, what's nit to like.

What do you want to do ?
New mailCopy

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

PS . A lot of large motorway service stations have the capacity for about 6 50KW chargers .

Not sure where that figure has come from?

Tesla Superchargers currently average 8.8 units per site

Included in this is the Park Royal site, that has 16 units at up to 250kW each.

Taking just the Tesla installations, without impacting the rest of the location then there is typically 2.2 MW available, not the 300 kW you are claiming?

If a Future Energy Scenario quotes just £million for the necessary EV points, if done in a single year that would only cost each taxpayer £10 - and it's not going to happen overnight.
If the result is cheaper motoring, then everyone actually saves in the long run (both financially and other ways) in what is a positive step in so many ways that it seems to scare people.

I'm still struggling to understand why people knock progress so much? Fear of change, worries about being left behind, traditional values?
There must be a reason why individuals are willing to just accept the current normal as being 'as good as it gets', when history teaches us every day that things will progress and improve as our understanding grows?

It doesn't mean we have to abandon the former technology - EV's are not a threat to historical vehicles once they are embraced and accepted as complementary instead of continuing blinkered campaigns against their development.

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Not sure where that figure has come from?

Tesla Superchargers currently average 8.8 units per site

Included in this is the Park Royal site, that has 16 units at up to 250kW each.

Taking just the Tesla installations, without impacting the rest of the location then there is typically 2.2 MW available, not the 300 kW you are claiming?

If a Future Energy Scenario quotes just £million for the necessary EV points, if done in a single year that would only cost each taxpayer £10 - and it's not going to happen overnight.
If the result is cheaper motoring, then everyone actually saves in the long run (both financially and other ways) in what is a positive step in so many ways that it seems to scare people.

I'm still struggling to understand why people knock progress so much? Fear of change, worries about being left behind, traditional values?
There must be a reason why individuals are willing to just accept the current normal as being 'as good as it gets', when history teaches us every day that things will progress and improve as our understanding grows?

It doesn't mean we have to abandon the former technology - EV's are not a threat to historical vehicles once they are embraced and accepted as complementary instead of continuing blinkered campaigns against their development.

Most sub stations in towns are rated at 50KVA or smaller .
A large industrial one , connected directly to the main very high voltage grid could be rated at 200KVA , which is not quite large enough for the 300 KW total I quoted .
There are bigger ones , and they could be made for the 600 or 700 Volt rating , but the price goes up enormously .


So your [ up to ] 2.2 MW is probably just the usual Tesla thing whereby the charge rate is reduced when several vehicles are connected at the same time , and total output is considerably less .

And as for cheaper motoring , pull the other one .
If it wasn,t for the tax on road fuels , then just about everything on running an EV would be more expensive .And why should taxpayers , some who do not drive , have to pay all of the EVs subsidies .

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

Most sub stations in towns are rated at 50KVA or smaller .
A large industrial one , connected directly to the main very high voltage grid could be rated at 200KVA , which is not quite large enough for the 300 KW total I quoted .
There are bigger ones , and they could be made for the 600 or 700 Volt rating , but the price goes up enormously .

Where are you getting these figures from? Can you provide a source?

SSE's guidance on "THE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF NEW SECONDARY SUBSTATIONS FOR ADOPTION OR USE BY SCOTTISH AND SOUTHERN ENERGY POWER DISTRIBUTION INCLUDING JOINT USER SUBSTATIONS"
'The minimum size of transformer currently permitted to comply with the SSEPD losses strategy is 500kVA.'

EDF Energy's "Schedule of Illustrative Charges" lists their Industrial or Commercial connections as 71-8,000 kVA.

UK Power Networks recently acknowledged that consumers want more flexibility in their offerings. This has led to them recognising that a 1,500 kVA transformer is a useful offering.

And Eaton's design guide for secondary substations states that - The following electrical ratings are typical:
■ Primary voltage: 2.4–38 kV
■ Transformer kVA: 300–3750
■ Secondary voltage: 208, 240, 480 or 600 V (maximum)


Is it possible that the designers of the EV charging points, and the professionals who work in the electrical distribution industry may have actually engaged and are working together to come up with solutions that work?
Or should we not trust the experts in the field, and just use our keyboards to tell them they are wrong with no evidence to back out claims up?
Is it true that vehicle manufacturers are deliberately harming the long term viability of their products and businesses by working on technology that is doomed to fail?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tel 911S

And why should taxpayers , some who do not drive , have to pay all of the EVs subsidies .

I don't know - maybe because that is the point of taxes. Many things are subsidised by taxes that only benefit those who use the service.

Should road tax be lower for those who drive less?
Should cyclists pay road tax?
Or for a really controversial point - why should taxpayers, some who do not become seriously ill, have to pay NHS subsidies?

I guess the real question is - is it wrong for taxes to be used for the benefit of others?

[Tel 911S]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Where are you getting these figures from? Can you provide a source?

SSE's guidance on "THE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF NEW SECONDARY SUBSTATIONS FOR ADOPTION OR USE BY SCOTTISH AND SOUTHERN ENERGY POWER DISTRIBUTION INCLUDING JOINT USER SUBSTATIONS"
'The minimum size of transformer currently permitted to comply with the SSEPD losses strategy is 500kVA.'

EDF Energy's "Schedule of Illustrative Charges" lists their Industrial or Commercial connections as 71-8,000 kVA.

UK Power Networks recently acknowledged that consumers want more flexibility in their offerings. This has led to them recognising that a 1,500 kVA transformer is a useful offering.

And Eaton's design guide for secondary substations states that - The following electrical ratings are typical:
■ Primary voltage: 2.4–38 kV
■ Transformer kVA: 300–3750
■ Secondary voltage: 208, 240, 480 or 600 V (maximum)


Is it possible that the designers of the EV charging points, and the professionals who work in the electrical distribution industry may have actually engaged and are working together to come up with solutions that work?
Or should we not trust the experts in the field, and just use our keyboards to tell them they are wrong with no evidence to back out claims up?
Is it true that vehicle manufacturers are deliberately harming the long term viability of their products and businesses by working on technology that is doomed to fail?

Without spending hours reading up your links , I am guessing that a lot of them are for distribution network transformers .So the high KVA readings are for the local 32 KV distribution , & as you might know , with the higher voltages , you can get a higher KVA with less current load .
But going from all of the installations I have seen , [ and I have seen a lot ], I have never seen an end user supply of more than 500 amps per phase . Which works out at 200 KVA for the 415 Volts .
As you say , there could well be bigger ones about , but that is getting up to about the limit of what end user equipment can safely cope with .

[crmalcolm]

I think the range of transformers (and associated power company guidance) demonstrates the market that is growing for the 500-3000 kVA / 400V+ requirements of EV charging.

Whether it's funded my market economics, subsidy, philanthropy or entrepreneurship - and the associated merits - is another debate.
But I feel it is hard to ignore that the migration to EVs as the dominant vehicle is happening.
This will mean things have to change - expectation, support, usage, infrastructure and probably ownership models. There are drawbacks too, but that can come with any technology. I just hope people are realistic about what it means, avoid scaremongering or the doom-and-gloom approach, and begin to embrace the positives.

[S griffin]

It will take time, but the EV cars have a good base to start from. The technology won’t change overnight. It still has a long way to go compared to the normal everyday cars we see. I agree we should embrace the technology as a means to the future. It’s not like they’ve taken over the car industry. They are a good alternative to petrol cars. The only problem, there’s not quite enough of these electric cars at the moment, but then again the world is still learning on how to get the best out of them

[Lancsbreaker]

As ever I'm a little trepid about entering the dialogue of the deaf between CRMalcom and Tel911S, but I wonder whether there are other issues rather than the minutiae of charging distribution and capacity, and the economic justification for its funding......


And at the risk of dragging the debate (aka slanging match) back to something motorsport related on this motorsport forum, do the concerns and caveats expressed in the recently issued Motorsport UK document ( https://www.motorsportuk.org/wp-cont...eid=4371805fba ) highlight safety concerns with the more general spread of EVs that don't seem to have been mentioned elsewhere? It may be that MUK are being very over-cautious, but certainly I wasn't aware of some of the potential issues should I come across a Nissan Leaf or a Tesla that's been involved in an RTA.