On 26/05/2021 21:07, Tim Streater wrote:
On 26 May 2021 at 20:10:00 BST, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 26/05/2021 17:29, Tim Streater wrote:
On 26 May 2021 at 15:30:21 BST, newshound
wrote:

I forget the numbers, but doesn't a motorway petrol station effectively
deliver tens of megawatts of power when its fuel pumps are all going.
So, to achieve equivalent performance in terms of "refuelling" times
recharging stations are going to need fairly substantial grid
connections as we reduce the present battery charging rate restrictions.

Yes yes, I've made this point a number of times. Good to see you've been
paying attention.

And I have also said that its no worse than a railway substation to feed
a railway line

Its predictable in terms of time cost and technology. Either its
commercially viable or it isn't but technically its standard crap

True, but think how many petrol stations there are doing this. Practically
every supermarket branch.


And that all happened over a period of years. In fact there are many
less petrol stations than there used to be.

Look: to 'do electric cars' requires a 3:1 grid upgrade give or take.
So you are looking at massive amounts of cable laying - probably
underground and probably at the 33kv level for major charge points
rather than 11kv anyway...

Well we have seen fibre optic cable go from the lab to something a bog
standard openreach engineer can install...once the roads have been dug
up... in less than 40 years.

IF there is a good reason to do it, infrastructure can be laid down and
pay for itself.

Telegraph, telephone, railways, canals, paved roads, electricity grid,
Internet, gas grid, water supplies, sewage systems - all were
inconceivable but got built anyway.

So I have no problem with charging electric cars. If it needs to be done
it can be done. What can't be done in my opinion is to make batteries
sufficiently good to fully replace fuel, and indeed there are severe
limitations on the supply of lithium to do it.

That is the critical question - not charging. To wit "Can we develop a
battery that is good enough, cheap enough (especially in how much energy
it takes to manufacture) and does not exhaust available resources?"

My claim is that we cannot, at least with electrochemical batteries.

God saw fit to give us hydrocarbon fuels and an abundance of Oxygen, he
did not see fit to give us a decent method of storing similar quantities
of energy in batteries.

It is a bummer, but that is the reality we have to deal with.

If we had decent batteries, all else necessary would be possible.
Trouble is we don't, and we almost certainly never will.

If the wind blew steadily and constantly windmills would be a reasonable
way to generate electricity, trouble is it doesn't, and never will.

If it were sunny day and night, solar panels would be a reasonable way
to generate electricity, trouble is it isn't, and never will be.

If we had a containment system that could keep a plasma hot enough and
at high enough pressure to sustain nuclear fusion, we could have access
to huge amounts of carbon free energy, Trouble is, we don't, and ther is
no guarantee we ever will have.

As an engineer, technology has to pass several tests. None of which are
applied by ArtStudents„¢

1/. Is it theoretically possible ?
2/. Is it practically possible?
3/. Is it cost effective compared with other ways of achieving the same
ends?

The world is awash with clever ArtStudent„¢ ideas that fail one or more
of these criteria.

Universal electric cars are probably a great example.

--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp