Electricity consumption

Page 3 of 5  
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:59:51 -0700, Smitty Two

I bet it doesn't do both at the same time. If you go fast, I bet you don't go far.
We still have not heard what the A/C and the heat does to the battery but when you consider a car AC is about 1.5 to 2 tons of air and the heater is around 85kBTU they either have a wimpy HVAC system or your battery will not run very long.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 23:02:43 -0700, Smitty Two

That is the "HVAC penalty" for speed (more air flow over the skin) It doesn't say what the base load for A/C is. The guys with A/C units on big boats would have a better idea of that but they all use generator sets, not batteries. Heat is another issue. That one is simple. 1KWH = 3400 BTUs and if you are planning on electric heat, you better wear a snowmobile suit if you live up north or you are not driving very far.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:49:21 -0700, Smitty Two

It is a couple of horsepower (electric). In a car they say it is a cylinder (your 6 becomes a 5 with the AC on) but the typical car AC may not be as efficient as a totally electric one. Your typical car AC is also about a ton and a half or two tons so you could probably compare that to what a home AC of that size uses. The reason they use so much Ac is to be able to bring a 130 degree car down to a reasonable temperature in a reasonable time but the shorter the trips, the more that is important to you. Heat may actually be a bigger issue since this will be pure resistive electric. I suppose they can scavenge a little heat from the motor and battery pack.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:51:30 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

What's wrong with a heat pump cooling the engine and electronics etc, instead of resistive heat??? You DO have an AC system, right??
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:43:23 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

The amount of heat generated there is insignificant compared to what it takes to heat a car, particularly where you are. Car heaters start at around 85,000 BTU and go up from there. It is just one of the advantages of the horrible efficiency of the ICE
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:03:53 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

So you use a bit of resistive heat to get the car started warming up. You do not need it to be 90F in the car in the middle of winter, 40 is plenty.During MOST of the time, a heat pump would manage keeping it at that after a few minutes of "boost" heat - at least in most of populated North America (including Southern and central Ontario. Heck even my PT cruiser hardly gets the car warm on the way to work, and coming home the sun usually has the car warm enough (if it has been shining) that the heater is hardly required except on the coldest or stormy days. Not toasty, but reasonably comfortable (better than a snowmobile or motorcycle, for sure)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mar 17, 2:39pm, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I'm sure you'd sell plenty of those. Here's our electric vehicle sir. It costs $40K, just $25K after all the tax payers kick in, goes 100 miles, and it features a heater that will keep you at a comfortable 40F in winter......

That's very reassuring. Of course I could be an ICE car that's bigger, has real heating and AC and costs a mere $20K.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:27:01 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

I don't know many people who would consider 40f "comfortable" That was always the redeeming value of having a car. Once that heater got going, you could crank it up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:42:37 -0700, Smitty Two

Most commuters dress for work.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:24:24 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I dress for work UNDER my winter coat.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:28:56 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Well, at 40F it doesn't feel nearly as bad when you get out into -20 weather as it does when you get out of an 80F car.
I like having it warm enough to keep the windows clear and my back from spasming - which, with a coat, is no more than about 50F.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I doubt heat pumps are going to be the answer because they do not give you that instant blast of heat people expect in a car. They also start losing efficiency as it gets colder outside, being pretty much useless below 35-40 degrees.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

From Forbes:
"The Chevrolet Volt is beginning to look like it was manufactured by Atlas Shrugged Motors, where the government mandates everything politically correct, rewards its cronies and produces junk steel.
"...Volt sales are anemic: 326 in December, 321 in January, and 281 in February. GM announced a production run of 100,000 in the first two years. Who is going to buy all these cars?
"Consumer Reports averaged a paltry 25 miles of electric-only running, in part because it was testing in cold Connecticut."
http://www.forbes.com/2011/03/16/chevy-volt-ayn-rand-opinions-patrick-michaels.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But given the current set=up of the electrical grid in the US, all you are doing (or likely to do over the next 20 years or so) is move the pollution from the tailpipe to the smokestack. That source is not likely to be hydro, etc., in most places in the US.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

You have a cite on that?
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not that electric motors are more efficient, but that the pollution would be less. Especially if we have to add more generation capacity to cover the added electrical needs (which if you have a study on that part, too, I would appreciate it.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

I can see scenarios where that could occur. Which is pretty much why I ask the question. If for no other reason that just because they are more efficient as a group, doesn't necessarily mean that they will be in a specific application.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I would modify the statement just a WEE bit. The smokestack CAN be considerably cleaner than the tailpipes because the combination of electrical generators and electric motors can be appreciably more efficient than internal combustion engines.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:52:38 -0700, Smitty Two

I am not sure that will always be true. The modern IC engine is pretty clean and we still have a lot of dirty coal plants. Scientific American did a study on this about a year ago. It looks pretty ugly for an electric car in the upper mid west.
You also have a lot of losses between the generation source and the end user. Most overhead transmission lines are literally too hot to touch, just from the I2R losses. It is more expensive (financially, politically and NIMBY wise) to put in more lines than it is to eat the losses.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:55:28 -0700, Smitty Two

If they were that hot they'd sizzle inthe rain, sag terribly when dry, and tighten up quickly in the rain.. That does not happen, because the wires do not get that warm. That's not to say there is not appreciable loss - but let's face it, these are AIR COOLED conductors, miles long, so even unacceptable power losses would not cause significant heating of the cables.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.