Free 7 Day Trial RV GPS App RV Trip Planner Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Free 7 Day Trial ×
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-24-2019, 09:45 PM   #41
2 Rivet Member
 
2017 19' Flying Cloud
Calgary , Alberta
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 90
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidsonOverlander View Post
That depends on where you live. Canada has less than 20% of electricity coming from fossil fuels, and Ontario where I live is at about 5%. It's true that many places are still using coal to generate electricity, but that's looking more and more like a political decision.

GHG emissions per kwh can vary greatly. Across Canada it goes from a low of 1.2 grams in Quebec to a high of 790 grams in Alberta. I would imagine the variations across America would be similar.

The difference I see is that if one buys an electric car in an area that currently uses coal for electricity you still have the potential for your grid to become greener over the life of the vehicle. If you buy an ICE it's likely to have a fixed production of greenhouse gases over its life.
Actually, from OPGs website 17% is fossil fuel and 58% is nuclear
Ronyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 04:15 AM   #42
3 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Flying Cloud
Grass Lake , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephraim View Post
If only someone had developed electric motors that would fit in the wheels of the vehicle. Then all you would need is a generator where your transmission used to fit. You would then get the best of both worlds... Efficiency of the fuel source (diesel engine) and the torque profile of the electric motor.. Oh wait...

R. G. LeTourneau

Full disclosure - I'm an alumni of LeTourneau University with degrees in Metallurgy and Electrical Engineering.

University & auto companies have been working on wheel motors for cars since the 1990's. The problem is getting the heat out of them when you make them so small, the nasty environment, and where do you put the brakes (they generate additional heat when used -- even with regenerative braking you still need friction brakes).
oldenavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 04:20 AM   #43
3 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Flying Cloud
Grass Lake , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Runs_4_beer View Post
EV's will require you to think differently about long-distance travel. Battery technology and charging will improve. We have already seen huge advancements in just the past few year. But even with current technology, I'm ok to stop every 200 miles or so if it means it costs a fraction to fill up and I'm not burning though old dinosaur bones. This "inconvenience" will only be for the few times of year I travel with the trailer. The other 80-90% of the time I drive, an EV is perfect.

I just told my wife the other day that I think fuel cells will be the future too. But that technology is probably 10 years away or more. So I fully agree that the future will be some combo of things, but no more gas or diesel.

True. I used to work with a guy who owns a Tesla and lives in NJ. He travels to DC regularly and plans in a stop at one of the rest areas in MD or DE to recharge his car. He catches up on email while the Tesla re-charges.



When I used to fly out of Dulles a lot, it was almost worth buying an EV for the close in special reserved parking spaces -- better location than the handicapped spaces.
oldenavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 04:40 AM   #44
3 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Flying Cloud
Grass Lake , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by John&Vicki View Post
Type of energy source used for propulsion, particularly for cars and trucks, is a complex issue. Which makes for a potentially interesting discussion. Im agnostic about it, free of political or financial conflicts, so Ill just wail away.

Here are some salient facts, in no particular order, about gasoline, diesel and electric motors. Im not going to cite sources (with apologies to Vaughn ) as its too laborious and Im not trying to write a Masters Thesis here.

Efficiency Compared
  • Conventional gasoline vehicles convert about 17%21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.
  • A typical diesel automotive engine operates at around 30%-35% efficient.
  • Electric motors are typically 85%-90% efficient.

Other things to tackle include:
  • consumer cost per comparable unit
  • production environmental cost per comparable unit
  • consumption environmental cost per comparable unit
  • geopolitical consequences
  • dependability
  • longevity
  • convenience

Anyone?

Cheers,
John

John,
Good list! But need to be careful when throwing efficiency numbers around. Gasoline vehicles, auto engines and electric motors is apples, oranges and bananas comparison. For a fair comparison, need to look at total system efficiency from input (electricity or fuel stored) to wheels. On EV's, that includes battery, motors & converters (rectifier/charger, DC-DC and inverter to drive the motor). Off the top of my head, I would guess system efficiency (onboard) for EV's to be in the 50-65% range, based on known efficiencies of major components.


Your geopolitical one is a good point. Nobody has mentioned that China has ~90% of the world's production of rare earth metals required to make Li batteries and PM motors. If they jack up prices again like they did in 2010, all the economics of EV's would change drastically. US & Canada have huge ore deposits of rare earths but the process of refining the ore is so environmentally unfriendly that there's only one compnay doing it in the US (mostly for military applications that require buy USA in the contract and only because there was Defense Production Act (Title III) money given to them).
oldenavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 06:35 AM   #45
Rivet Master
 
DavidsonOverlander's Avatar

 
1964 26' Overlander
1974 31' Sovereign
Milton , ON
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,163
Images: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronyx View Post
Actually, from OPGs website 17% is fossil fuel and 58% is nuclear
I think that info is from a 2010 document that is still on the internet. That was before Ontario closed all of its coal plants. I said 5% was from fossil fuels in my previous message, but it looks like it was 6.2% for 2018.

From: https://www.powerstream.ca/regulator...upply-mix.html
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2019-07-25 at 8.34.08 AM.png
Views:	34
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	347562  
__________________
1974 Sovereign
2005 F-350 SRW 4x4 crew cab long box
TAC ON-5

1965 Avion C-10 Truck Camper (65avion.home.blog)
DavidsonOverlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 06:51 AM   #46
4 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Classic
Belen , New Mexico
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldenavy View Post
John,
Good list! But need to be careful when throwing efficiency numbers around. Gasoline vehicles, auto engines and electric motors is apples, oranges and bananas comparison. For a fair comparison, need to look at total system efficiency from input (electricity or fuel stored) to wheels. On EV's, that includes battery, motors & converters (rectifier/charger, DC-DC and inverter to drive the motor). Off the top of my head, I would guess system efficiency (onboard) for EV's to be in the 50-65% range, based on known efficiencies of major components.
The part missing in that list is the "energy density" of the various sources. The gas/diesel technology is pretty well at it's peak density. Every year there are small gains, but I doubt we will see vast improvements unless some new technology is discovered. But in reality, the same goes for battery technology. Batteries are definitely improving, but the energy density of the storage medium will never even come close to hydrocarbon fuels. I've seen some charts that had the mediums close, but they forget to include the weight of the storage mediums.

I don't particularly like this guy, but his video makes some salient points regarding energy density: Why Tesla batteries SUCK!! He also takes on several newer technologies in other videos. The energy density of 1970's fossile fuel tech is pretty hard to beat on the scale that a TV would need. This is why I think the future of TV is in the electric wheel hybrid. You can run the fossil fuel at the optimum efficiency and get the torque curve where you need it.
Ephraim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 05:24 PM   #47
Rivet Master
 
2012 19' International
Southeastern MI , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidsonOverlander View Post
The problem with cost per mile is that it only considers your personal cost, then again, maybe that's all you care about. ICEs have an additional cost in terms of health problems caused by air pollution and carbon emissions which are causing climate change. Electric vehicles are not without environmental costs for battery production.
If people really cared about the environment theyd quit watching 75 TVs and shut off air conditioning. When they do Ill start worrying about the effects of producing batteries.

I may be the worlds only non-treehugger that thinks EVs are cool.
Countryboy59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 05:27 PM   #48
Rivet Master

 
2007 22' International CCD
Corona , California
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8,890
And we thought diesels had torque

My usual cynical comment is, Ive never met a cold, wet, hungry environmentalist in the wild.
__________________
Rich, KE4GNK/AE, Overkill Engineering Dept.
'The Silver HamShack' ('07 International 22FB CCD 75th Anniversary)
Multiple Yaesu Ham Radios inside and many antennae sprouting from roof, ProPride hitch, Prodigy P2 controller.
2012 shortbed CrewMax 4x4 Toyota Tacoma TV with more antennae on it.
rmkrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 05:40 PM   #49
Rivet Master
 
overlander63's Avatar
 
1993 21' Sovereign
Colfax , North Carolina
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 21,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by John&Vicki View Post

Beer Runner makes a good point - how is highway construction going to be funded when gasoline sales start dwindling? Theres going to have to be another funding mechanism. Perhaps some sort of mileage tax on vehicles?
The highway use tax for my pickup is $500.64.
__________________
Terry
overlander63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 05:47 PM   #50
3 Rivet Member
 
Portland , Oregon
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 134
Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered vehicles (cars, long-haul trucks, trains, ferries, forklifts, etc.) are the future for any transportation needs other than local commutes.

And, the "future is here". There are already over 20,000 Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered forklifts in use in the U.S. (replacing propane and electric ones), and that number is growing about 10%+ each year.

Hydrogen Fuel Cell passenger cars are not science fiction. They are being produced and used everyday by thousands of people around the world. What is great about Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered vehicles is their range between refueling compared to electric---much, much better. Most are close to 400 miles between refueling. A Chinese company will be producing a passenger Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicle for the Chinese consumer market starting in 1st Q of 2020 that reportedly will have a range of 650+ miles.

A U.S. company is now building long-haul trucks powered exclusively with Hydrogen Fuel Cells. And, yes, with a Hydrogen production company partner, they plan to build a network of Hydrogen refueling stations across the U.S. and into Canada to serve not only large trucks, but also passenger vehicles.

This is an area I'm focused on, so I could go on and on, but won't.

Note a key point: We can convert wastes/residues (anything you can imagine including Medical Wastes) into Fuel Cell Grade Hydrogen. And, it can be done with a net positive energy (we produce more energy than we consume and it is not fossil fuel energy). Yes, that technology is available today--not science fiction.

Cheers,
Bryan
blacklab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 09:17 PM   #51
4 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Classic
Belen , New Mexico
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklab View Post
Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered vehicles (cars, long-haul trucks, trains, ferries, forklifts, etc.) are the future for any transportation needs other than local commutes.
I don't think so. When you consider only the energy density of the fuel, hydrogen comes out pretty good, but when you also add into that the weight of the storage container, the energy density of hydrogen drops precipitously. (And batteries fail miserably in this aspect) If you watch that video I posted earlier, there is some pretty good information on that right around the 12 minute mark. Including the weight of the storage container for the fuel, Hydrogen comes out about half that of gasoline.

Add to that the volatility of hydrogen and there are significant problems. I wonder how many ruptured tanks it will take to kill that initiative? Hydrogen is a scary gas if you've ever done any work with it at all. I've spent some time on highway accidents as a volunteer firefighter. Spilled diesel is an environmental concern. spilled gasoline is dangerous. I can't imagine how bad a ruptured hydrogen tank would be if it doesn't immediately burn off like the media portrays it. Any delay in the ignition and you have a serious bomb on your hands.

Marketing hype aside, fossil fuels are here to stay and the real future is in hybrid fossil fuel/electric.
Ephraim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2019, 09:43 PM   #52
3 Rivet Member
 
Portland , Oregon
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 134
Stay tuned. It's not marketing hype.

Watch what China does over the next 3-5 years in expanding Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered transportation of all types.

Cheers,

Bryan
blacklab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2019, 11:03 AM   #53
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Georgetown (winter)Thayne (summer) , Texas & Wyoming
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,174
Remember "laugh-in"? "do you believe in the hear after?" Not sure any of us will be around for a real cost effective alternative for a TV with a larger AS behind it that can go more than 200 miles before a charge...but good to see the information and that many folks are pushing the technology. Likely more cost efficient generators could be developed along with better solar charging for the Li's is coming also?? I could sit and read this thread for hours, but I would rather be out enjoying my AS this summer...especially since we finally have some decent weather here in MT!

By the way, little Lincoln, MT has 2 concerts and a car show this weekend, if any of you are in the area....remember "Rare Earth"? Still pretty good fishing also....beat the heat and rock on in Lincoln this weekend!
__________________
Empty Nesters; Gypsies on the road!
2017 28' Twin Flying Cloud
2017 F250 King Ranch, 4X4, 6.7L, Blue-Ox WDH
Summer-Star Valley Ranch RV Resort (Thayne, WY); Winter-Sun City (Georgetown,TX)
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2019, 08:30 AM   #54
Rivet Master
 
2012 19' International
Southeastern MI , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,211
I don’t think it matters whether the technology to pull a trailer ever changes. The vast majority of car trips are within EV range, and 50% are 5 miles or less. 90% of commutes are less than 20 miles. The change in technology in the next 5 years will be more than we saw in the last 50 years.

In the grand scheme of things, what we tow RVs with really doesn’t matter. In 5 years I’m sure I will still have my Ram/Cummins (driven 5 or 6 times a year) in the garage, and something completely different for commuting.

By the way, I haven’t spent more than 20 minutes, in short 3 minute segments on this thread, not “hours”.
__________________
2018 International Serenity 27' FB
Michelin 16 tires
Hensley Arrow hitch

Tow Vehicle: 2020 F-350 6.7L Diesel
Countryboy59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2019, 08:15 PM   #55
Rivet Master
 
DewTheDew's Avatar
 
2017 27' Flying Cloud
Frederick , Maryland
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 509
A couple of quick comments. People like to say "what about when you throw your battery away?" but we will not be throwing EV batteries away. They will be recycled (though likely first they will be used for things like grid storage, where the requirements for energy density are not as strict as for EVs so a "depleted" EV battery will work fine for years on the grid). So really, no toxicity there.

Fuel cells have been the propulsion source of the future for decades and honestly it hasn't gotten much better. Cost, reliability, on-board storage of hydrogen, efficient and non polluting generation of hydrogen. All of these are a long ways from being solved. Plus infrastructure. The advantage of the EV is that the grid already exists but hydrogen lines do not. The one good thing; the fuel cell and the battery both drive electric motors so one can go down that path for a long ways and still not be totally committed to one or the other.

As for critical materials, probably the biggest issue is cobalt (sourced from ONE mine in the Democratic Republic of Congo). Lithium can be retrieved from sea water and in Bolivia. Because of recycling it doesn't really go away like fossil fuels; it is re-used so there is no need for an infinite source.

But I would also guess that for towing large trailers it will be a long time (I know....Rivian....) before the ICE is replaced. One thing someone mentioned in another thread is the ability to store energy in the trailer, which might help.

Interesting thread; glad it was started!
DewTheDew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2019, 10:19 PM   #56
Rivet Master
 
2017 28' International
Jim Falls , Wisconsin
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,652
Blog Entries: 1
I just hope all you Tesla owners are not surprised when Tesla goes broke. Stock is down $100 per share. It is P/E is totally out of whack. And investors want 10% on their bonds. And if their share price drops further watch that bond price skyrocket. They won’t be able to cash flow anything. Tesla will go the way of the rambler.
Daquenzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 06:14 AM   #57
Rivet Master
 
2012 19' International
Southeastern MI , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daquenzer View Post
I just hope all you Tesla owners are not surprised when Tesla goes broke. Stock is down $100 per share. It is P/E is totally out of whack. And investors want 10% on their bonds. And if their share price drops further watch that bond price skyrocket. They wont be able to cash flow anything. Tesla will go the way of the rambler.
Tesla accounts for a very small percentage of EV sales. I think Ford and GM will be fine. The EV is here to stay.
Countryboy59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 06:22 AM   #58
Rivet Master
 
2014 27' FB International
Macon , Georgia
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 571
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countryboy59 View Post
Tesla accounts for a very small percentage of EV sales. I think Ford and GM will be fine. The EV is here to stay.
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/07...ehicle-market/
Roadtech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 06:52 AM   #59
4 Rivet Member
 
2019 30' Classic
Belen , New Mexico
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadtech View Post
Now that was an interesting article. But I think you can read much more than just whose got the majority of the market. If I'm not mistaken, those numbers have no multipliers beside them. Tesla Model 3 owns 60% of the market with a measly sales of a little over 24000 units. All of the others combined don't even approach that number. No, I don't think this is the future. This is a fad. While I don't doubt that the electric motor is the future, how that motor is powered is what is in question. Neither batteries nor Hydrogen fuel cells will be the answer. carbon based fuels are at the pinnacle when it comes to energy density and it isn't going away in my lifetime. All other technologies either can't come close or are so dangerous that they will self limit their own use on a large scale.

For commuting purposes, I can see a future in a local power grid (much like a third rail system today), but fossil fuels will pretty much always be a part of the equation for cross country, independent TVs in the foreseeable future.
Ephraim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 08:01 AM   #60
Site Team
 
wulfraat's Avatar

 
2017 30' International
Broomfield , Colorado
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,300
Images: 1
And we thought diesels had torque

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephraim View Post
Now that was an interesting article. But I think you can read much more than just whose got the majority of the market. If I'm not mistaken, those numbers have no multipliers beside them. Tesla Model 3 owns 60% of the market with a measly sales of a little over 24000 units. All of the others combined don't even approach that number. No, I don't think this is the future. This is a fad. While I don't doubt that the electric motor is the future, how that motor is powered is what is in question. Neither batteries nor Hydrogen fuel cells will be the answer. carbon based fuels are at the pinnacle when it comes to energy density and it isn't going away in my lifetime. All other technologies either can't come close or are so dangerous that they will self limit their own use on a large scale.



For commuting purposes, I can see a future in a local power grid (much like a third rail system today), but fossil fuels will pretty much always be a part of the equation for cross country, independent TVs in the foreseeable future.


Since the post above is sighting statistics regarding the Tesla model 3, another interesting set of values to look at is sales volume as compared to internal combustion engine segment competitors.

In Q219, there were 77,634 Tesla model 3s delivered. All other class segment ICE competitors (BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Infiniti, Lexus, Acura, etc...) combined only delivered 60,999 vehicles in North America.

So one single make and model from a single manufacturer outsold all competitors in a highly competitive segment.

Just want to make sure you had the latest data on a comparison of EV vs. ICE sales volumes.

Time will tell if its a fad.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0044.JPG
Views:	25
Size:	197.7 KB
ID:	347816  
wulfraat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To Torque or Not to Torque bella_intl Wheels, Hubs & Bearings 50 08-31-2017 05:26 AM
Just when we thought we had it figured out...! cheetah1 Repairing/Replacing Floor &/or Frame 9 09-20-2014 09:10 AM
Thought I Had Seen It All....But Not This!!! Airhog1 Off Topic Forum 27 09-15-2008 10:21 PM
and you thought you had a motorhome! Excella CM Classic Motorhomes 3 12-29-2007 05:42 PM
Wow, thought I had been "kicked out" :) Kistler Forum Admin, News and Member Account Info 4 08-26-2006 06:13 PM


Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Airstream, Inc. or any of its affiliates. Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.