Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just don't have the time to read such long writing that obtuse the points I was trying to make.
Batteries for aircraft propulsion are just too heavy and take a too much cargo room in the aircraft, and the weight of the battery does not change between takeoff and landing (this weight is constant). Fuel is light, and does not take lots of cargo room. Also the total weight of the fuel is reduced from takeoff to the moment the aircraft lands and is parked. Also, during an emergency the pilot can eject fuel to make the air craft lighter (it would be difficult to eject batteries).
In the two Cooper Mini cars in the video, greater capacity batteries to extend its range enough to equal the range of its ICE counterpart would make it too heavy.
Your example of heating the cabin and roasting the occupants makes no sense. The cabin is heated to a comfortable level, and the heated air constantly cools at the perimeters (cabin walls/insulation, windows, and windshield). If your turn the heater off, the heat in the cabin dissipates through the walls and glass, and the cabin becomes cold after a period of time depending on the temperature outside the cabin.
The host in this video explains what happens to an EV if you want to extend its range with larger batteries. Also, the great efficiency of EV's is explained, plus what i mentioned before about the problem of battery and vehicle weight.
The EPA provides the testing protocol for evaluating EV range, while the automakers do the actual testing and rating of specific models. That's the same situation as we have with MPG testing for ICE vehicles.
Anyway, Consumer Reports tested a group of vehicles under uniform conditions to see if they could achieve their claimed range and there were some interesting results. Range is always going to vary with conditions of course, but as noted, all vehicles ran the same course and were driven the same - so if the course were somehow "difficult" that should have made it difficult for all vehicles.
I think minor deviations from the claimed range aren't significant. But large deviations are probably telling you something. One interesting trend was that Mercedez Benz and BMW models consistently outperformed their claimed range by a significant margin - these companies are probably rating their vehicles conservatively as a deliberate effort. BMW's ICE vehicles also have the reputation of delivering greater horsepower than is claimed in their specs - so that would be on-brand for them. I can definitely understand some companies thinking that it's better to underpromise and overdeliver than the opposite practice.
One thing not mentioned yet is the reduced EV range when there are more miles on the vehicle. Rather quickly, the range begins to reduce after just the first year. The downside of the magical EV’s.
One thing not mentioned yet is the reduced EV range when there are more miles on the vehicle. Rather quickly, the range begins to reduce after just the first year. The downside of the magical EV’s.
EVs do lose range over time, but in most systems I've read about, the losses haven't been that steep. For example, according to this Car & Driver article, the Tesla Model 3 battery is warranted for 8 years or 100k miles - whichever comes first, while the Hyundai Ioniq 5 battery is warranted for 10 years or 100k miles - whichever comes first, and in both cases, the car must retain 70% of its original range over that time period. Note that this won't be the average range loss - the automakers would suffer huge losses if they needed to replace battery packs under warranty for the average owner.
I just don't have the time to read such long writing that obtuse the points I was trying to make.
Batteries for aircraft propulsion are just too heavy and take a too much cargo room in the aircraft, and the weight of the battery does not change between takeoff and landing (this weight is constant). Fuel is light, and does not take lots of cargo room. Also the total weight of the fuel is reduced from takeoff to the moment the aircraft lands and is parked. Also, during an emergency the pilot can eject fuel to make the air craft lighter (it would be difficult to eject batteries).
In the two Cooper Mini cars in the video, greater capacity batteries to extend its range enough to equal the range of its ICE counterpart would make it too heavy.
Your example of heating the cabin and roasting the occupants makes no sense. The cabin is heated to a comfortable level, and the heated air constantly cools at the perimeters (cabin walls/insulation, windows, and windshield). If your turn the heater off, the heat in the cabin dissipates through the walls and glass, and the cabin becomes cold after a period of time depending on the temperature outside the cabin.
The host in this video explains what happens to an EV if you want to extend its range with larger batteries. Also, the great efficiency of EV's is explained, plus what i mentioned before about the problem of battery and vehicle weight.
It doesn't seem like you understand what I was saying to Hemlock140's post which is what led to this discussion in the first place.
It's unfortunately the case that some things just have a certain level of complexity and so it takes more to describe them. "Batteries are too heavy for planes" right now is accurate to your question about "why aren't we flying around with batteries in planes", but this is an automotive forum and so it's important to point out why this is a different situation from automobiles and why in an Automotive forum it should be pointed out that battery weight is not a particularly major factor at this moment. You still don't seem to understand why, and that's okay. However, I think it's important on a public forum to point out to others when you give people inaccurate information lest they take it as being accurate.
Nothing in the Mini Cooper video was about getting enough battery capacity would make it too heavy. The reason why the Mini Cooper doesn't get more capacity is because of budget, not weight.
The cabin roasting doesn't make sense because you're not reading it accurately. The amount of waste heat while idling is so much that it would roast people in the cabin were most of it shunted into the cabin. That's what was being said--not that the vehicle has a "roast occupants" option. You really don't get it.
I had already recapped those points in that video multiple times including in this thread. You simply don't understand what's being said. Obviously, automakers have been greatly increasing the average battery capacity in their EVs sold in the US as EVs outside of arguably two vehicles sold in the US are heavier than their ICE counterparts. Weight certainly does make things heavier and less efficient, but that's not why automakers haven't been adding more capacity to their vehicles to get more range now or in the recent past. Instead, the main factor has been the additional cost of production.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 12-10-2023 at 08:37 PM..
It doesn't seem like you understand what I was saying to Hemlock140's post which is what led to this discussion in the first place.
It's unfortunately the case that some things just have a certain level of complexity and so it takes more to describe them. "Batteries are too heavy for planes" right now is accurate to your question about "why aren't we flying around with batteries in planes", but this is an automotive forum and so it's important to point out why this is a different situation from automobiles and why in an Automotive forum it should be pointed out that battery weight is not a particularly major factor at this moment. You still don't seem to understand why, and that's okay. However, I think it's important on a public forum to point out to others when you give people inaccurate information lest they take it as being accurate.
OK, then. In order to increase an EV range, the Mini in this case, it would need a higher capacity battery, which in turn would make it heavier than what it already is. But to increase the drive range of the ICE mini Cooper by 30 or 40 miles, all is needed is another gallon of gasoline (6 pounds). Watch the video I posted. I asked you "how come batteries aren't used for aircraft propulsion, relates to the same things I have been telling you; "the problem for EVs and range is battery weight." While aircraft aren't mentioned in the video, anybody in this forum can understand what I have said, about what an increase in battery capacity (as using a larger battery) it results in more vehicle weight. Toward the end of the video the host tells why it is so difficult to built very large EV trucks (80,000-pound cargo trucks, for example). This also applies to aircraft.
Quote:
Nothing in the Mini Cooper video was about getting enough battery capacity would make it too heavy. The reason why the Mini Cooper doesn't get more capacity is because of budget, not weight.
Your assumption is nothing but amazing Who's budget are you referring to? The eMini Cooper falls perfectly in the right place within the EV market. Consumers who want a fun little vehicle that does not cost an arm and a leg, is still luxurious, and has the right drive range the meets the needs or wants of those who want it. Not all buyers need or want long range electric vehicles. This little vehicle is already heavier than the ICE Mini Cooper, so adding 30 or 40 more miles to its range by replacing the battery with a larger one, would make it even heavier and more expensive than what it already is. Watch the video and you will understand what I am telling you (vehicle power to weight ratio, rolling resistance changes because of the added weight, and so on). That little battery in the Mini is not cheap at all.
Quote:
The cabin roasting doesn't make sense because you're not reading it accurately. The amount of waste heat while idling is so much that it would roast people in the cabin were most of it shunted into the cabin. That's what was being said--not that the vehicle has a "roast occupants" option. You really don't get it.
What you are saying makes no sense whatsoever. The person in the cabin controls the amount of heat or she wants in the cabin, just like he or she does at home.
Quote:
I had already recapped those points in that video multiple times including in this thread. You simply don't understand what's being said. Obviously, automakers have been greatly increasing the average battery capacity in their EVs sold in the US as EVs outside of arguably two vehicles sold in the US are heavier than their ICE counterparts. Weight certainly does make things heavier and less efficient, but that's not why automakers haven't been adding more capacity to their vehicles to get more range now or in the recent past. Instead, the main factor has been the additional cost of production.
The greater the battery capacity (larger and larger battery) in a vehicle, the heavier it becomes, the greater its rolling resistance, the more expensive the vehicle becomes, and the more expensive the charging of these batteries become. The hummer is not cheap at all, and so it's over 2,500-pound battery (watch the videos relating to how much it costs to fully charge the battery in the 10,000-pound Hummer. It is the same for ICE vehicles, and that the more tank capacity (bigger tank) , the more you pay at the pump
Watch the video and see how much weight, and the cost of adding a battery with a capacity that equals the amount of energy = to what a gallon of gasoline contains.
OK, then. In order to increase an EV range, the Mini in this case, it would need a higher capacity battery, which in turn would make it heavier than what it already is. But to increase the drive range of the ICE mini Cooper by 30 or 40 miles, all is needed is another gallon of gasoline (6 pounds). Watch the video I posted. I asked you "how come batteries aren't used for aircraft propulsion, relates to the same things I have been telling you; "the problem for EVs and range is battery weight." While aircraft aren't mentioned in the video, anybody in this forum can understand what I have said, about what an increase in battery capacity (as using a larger battery) it results in more vehicle weight. Toward the end of the video the host tells why it is so difficult to built very large EV trucks (80,000-pound cargo trucks, for example). This also applies to aircraft.
Your assumption is nothing but amazing Who's budget are you referring to? The eMini Cooper falls perfectly in the right place within the EV market. Consumers who want a fun little vehicle that does not cost an arm and a leg, is still luxurious, and has the right drive range the meets the needs or wants of those who want it. Not all buyers need or want long range electric vehicles. This little vehicle is already heavier than the ICE Mini Cooper, so adding 30 or 40 more miles to its range by replacing the battery with a larger one, would make it even heavier and more expensive than what it already is. Watch the video and you will understand what I am telling you (vehicle power to weight ratio, rolling resistance changes because of the added weight, and so on). That little battery in the Mini is not cheap at all.
What you are saying makes no sense whatsoever. The person in the cabin controls the amount of heat or she wants in the cabin, just like he or she does at home.
The greater the battery capacity (larger and larger battery) in a vehicle, the heavier it becomes, the greater its rolling resistance, the more expensive the vehicle becomes, and the more expensive the charging of these batteries become. The hummer is not cheap at all, and so it's over 2,500-pound battery (watch the videos relating to how much it costs to fully charge the battery in the 10,000-pound Hummer. It is the same for ICE vehicles, and that the more tank capacity (bigger tank) , the more you pay at the pump
Watch the video and see how much weight, and the cost of adding a battery with a capacity that equals the amount of energy = to what a gallon of gasoline contains.
Yea, increasing the battery capacity increases the range. I had written that multiple times earlier in that adding battery capacity adds much more in range than the vehicle loses in efficiency from greater battery weight. That's why the vast majority of longer range EVs right now are heavier than their ICE counterparts. This is a trade-off that automakers are very willing to do, because it's what consumers are responding to. Part of the reason why this works is that with greater battery capacity also comes faster peak charging and greater power output to more than offset the weight increase. That's a large part of the rationale for why the constraining factor for automakers with adding more battery capacity isn't the weight, because they are happily doing so, but rather the cost of more battery capacity.
The current version of the Mini Electric is an interesting case, but understand that it's a far outlier among mass production EVs available in the US. Mini opted for lower costs by shoving the older BMW i3 powertrain into the existing ICE Mini and kept the price, power output, and weight somewhat similar to the ICE one. Getting that price point and not putting in the funding for an EV-dedicated platform though had the trade-off of needing to use a battery pack that has a capacity far lower than most EVs sold in the US at 114 miles and ~28 kWh usable battery capacity. This is a very different trade-off from what other EV automakers operating in the US did where they opted for more battery capacity and often significantly more weight and generally a higher price point than their closest ICE counterparts. It's an outlier. The budget here is in reference to specifically this issue--that more battery capacity will be much higher cost compared to its closest ICE competitors. The battery isn't cheap, but it's a lot cheaper than if it had gone for the US new EV average that's running between 60 to 80 something kWh. That's what most EVs in production and sold in the US have, so it's not really weight that's the primary issue--it's cost.
I think I was pretty clear on why aircrafts aren't currently a primary target for electrification as opposed to road vehicles. That additional weight of more capacity is a much greater factor in that situation than it is for road vehicles (and rail vehicle and maritime vehicles--basically anything that offsets most of the force of gravity via a normal force through physical contact or buoyancy). Road vehicles have a very different context and thus are competitive or close to competitive in multiple segments whereas electric planes are generally not save for some very, very niche uses.
The example of roasting in the cabin from waste heat idling engines generate is meant to illustrate just how much waste heat is generated. It's not to say that people and automakers are building vehicles with the design intent of roasting the occupants, but rather that so much waste heat is generated that most of that heat in most winter conditions would not serve a useful purpose of warming up the cabin. Instead, most of it goes to waste instead of being piped into warm the cabin. If this example is still too hard to understand, then perhaps it's easier to state outright that what it's illustrating is that EVs are a lot more efficient with heating when idling (like the conditions Hemlock140 had mentioned) to the point where most EVs in production sold in the US, with the exception of the Mini Electric and possibly the Nissan Leaf, will outlast their closest ICE counteparts in a test of hours spent idling in winter conditions on a full battery/tank.
This is not a scientific test about the claimed drive range versus actual range of four EV's. The cars were driven until their respective batteries died, a Mercedes, BMW, Tesla, and Ford Mustang:
And thanks to AutdorLover for starting this thread that nearly got derailed by me and somebody else. Please accept my most sincere apology. I found the following youtube video where the hosts discuss the CR findings about claimed versus actual EV mile ranges (just keep in mind the tests were conducted during the summer). You will notice that in the link posted by OutdoorLover most of the EV's that rated highest in the list are European models (Mercedes and BMW), and surprisingly, an American model (Mustang) made it to the list among a couple of other foreign brands:
One example. The Chevy Bolt, rated at 258 miles of range at an average of 3.8 miles/kWh (66 kWh battery). Most drivers are getting well over that from spring through fall. 4-5 miles/kWh is fairly easy to achieve without hypermiling or only driving slowly. Note the range estimates in the middle of the displays.
Would be interesting to see if one of these Government cars could drive from Duluth to Minneapolis in the snow at 10 below zero.
I know a lot of people who use them regularly in those conditions. Here's one in Canada. Note the outside temp on the display:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who's budget are you referring to? The eMini Cooper falls perfectly in the right place within the EV market. Consumers who want a fun little vehicle that does not cost an arm and a leg, is still luxurious, and has the right drive range the meets the needs or wants of those who want it. Not all buyers need or want long range electric vehicles. This little vehicle is already heavier than the ICE Mini Cooper, so adding 30 or 40 more miles to its range by replacing the battery with a larger one, would make it even heavier and more expensive than what it already is. Watch the video and you will understand what I am telling you (vehicle power to weight ratio, rolling resistance changes because of the added weight, and so on). That little battery in the Mini is not cheap at all.
