"Dave Plowman (News)" with no logic wrote in message
...

It's interesting that the Lexus RX400 which uses a far more sophisticated
version of the hybrid drivetrain and is heralded as a breakthrough
produces 192 C02gm/km which is about the same as a new average family car.
Some breakthrough - apart from in its class. But it's not going to save
the planet.

But, and this has never sunk into your head of course, when running in towns
and cities, the emissions are drastically reduced. This keeps harmful
emissions from millions of lungs. There you go.

"Dave Plowman (News)" with no logic wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
I mean. how often do you need to carry family or friends?

Good observation. The percentage of time that only onen person is in a
car is way into the 90s.

Then for your town car, you get a Smart.

I need a car that can be town and Mway and trunk road and carry 4/5
passengers in comfort and is not a death trap and helps save the planet.
You see that is why I bought the Prius.

"Dave Plowman (News)" babbled away in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power
the electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along
with the engine. The engine is specifically adapted for the
application.

Now let me see. The engine is directly coupled to the wheels under
some circumstances, and at the same time is running a generator which
is also supplying power to the wheels via an electric motor.

Got it in one.

You really haven't a clue, do you?

Do you mean the Prius does not do that?
Tell us how it works then. Give
us a clue, better still explain how it works.
Now take note. Don't make
things up as you usually do.

There's no point.

...and in that you are right. Now you were told not to make things up, and
you did just that.

"Dave Plowman (News)" frothed in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:

Mr Cranium, the Prius, the one out of the box at the local deals does
NOT
have a CVT.

Then find a dealer who has new stock, fool.

Richard, again for you, the Prius, the one out of the box at the local deals
does NOT have a CVT. Note: CVT = pullies and belts.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:27:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


I doubt we even quite touched 50 on the motorway - inside lane all the
way.

Door to door including some 10 miles crossing London before hitting the
motorway, the BMW did 44 mpg.

Well exactly ..

Now if someone comes up with
a practical hybrid / fuel cell or even a
tradional car that does 200 mpg
(equiv cost / mile) then I can see
folk clambering for them, but only
55 mpg .. hardly worth the effort
when there is such choice already?

Oh my God this is getting worse. Two loonies now. Are you agreeing with Mr
Cranium that the BMW averages 44mpg? Now think hard. 44mpg in your dreams.
A normal sized car, with good performance, that does 55-65mpg is well worth
having. Folks are clambering for the Prius, there is a waiting list all
over the world. Production is being increased with factories in the USA and
China making them to meet demand.

The car was on a limited production line, similar to the way sports cars are
made, now they may be on the full robotised lines, which means lower pricing
in the near future. By the end of the years about 30 hybrid car models will
be available world-wide. Within a few years Toyota hope to other every car
in their range a choice of hybrid or the dirty, nosier alternative. By then
the price difference may have dropped towards the hybrid.

They say something about 'a fool and his money' don't they?

They do, and they buy normal cars. See other post on pricings.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 14:18:39 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:

They were? My first Moggy van had crossplies and in the mud / snow /
ice outperfomed my mates RS2000 tractionwise ;-) (narrower tyres =
more traction in mud / snow etc ..( more chance of 'digging in'))?

I bow to your greater knowledge, I've no idea what an RS2000 is!

MKII Ford Escort with a 2L Pinto engine in it (or summat like that)
His big wide tryes didn't work in snow like my narrow ones as he found
when entering someones front drive by mistake! ;-(

LOL!


In spite of advanced training etc there will be times when you simply
don't have a chance (this could have been one of them for many folk)
and although I know I'm not as good a driver as I was (bad habits /
slower reactions / worse eyesight etc) I believe I am (still)
generally more considerate than many?

I hope so. But why bad habits? If you know you have them you could do
something about them.

Well I suppose it comes down to focus. Simplistically, when you new
you look ahead because that's where you are going. As you get more
experienced you look around (as such) to take in other information
that may affect you (schools, crossings, vehicles overtaking,
hedgelines, road surface etc etc). When you get more experienced you
know where you can (as in 'get away with') pay less attention. Eg, I
think I'm still safe but might' go through I local camera because I
know what speed is 'safe' (lived here 48 years).

And nothing's changed in 48 years?

I try not to prejudge folk (I wouldn't have do that with you and the
slope etc) .. like the young lady that drove a diesel tranny van round
the "Ring" 9 seconds slower than Clarkeson could in a Jag ;-)

Don't know anything about that - but speed simply isn't everything.

Indeed, except it's quite important in motor racing ;-)

The 'skill' in this case was taking an inappropriate vehicle around a
track at high speed and not loosing it. A skill that was simply
demonstrated when a real racing driver took the "Star in a reasonably
price car" around the Top Gear track and got the best time ever, in
spite of some of the opposition being very much 'into' cars.

Right, I didn't know what the 'Ring' was.

Was I expected to?

Mary

Mary Fisher wrote:

Ah well, if it was on BBC it MUST be true, I can't compete with that noble
body.

Why do you find it difficult to believe the men and women have different
mental capabilities and specialisations? I am not suggesting either
one is "better" just different. It applies to all sorts of capabilities
including hearing and eyesight.

Anything on a subject like that which is 'entertaining' to some might not be
to everyone.

Indeed it may not - but don't judge a book by its cover. By
"entertaining" I mean it is not just a dry text covering the science,
but also includes real world examples of how it applies.

What's more, in my experience women are far better at loading a
dishwasher economically. That's an example of spatial awareness.

Also comes down to experience - perhaps women tend to load dishwashers
more often than their menfolk?


That might be true in your household but here Spouse pulls his weight :-)

I find if I load it I get 50% more in it per load. However there will be
a small number of items that don't get washed correctly and will need
putting in again. Personally I accept this limitation and consider the
benefits outweigh the limitations. SWMBO tells me off however ;-)

And I follow him round re-doing things. Many women do, they have to for the
sake of efficiency.

I rest my case ;-)

Er -what have stokes (sic) to do with spatial (not spacial) awareness?

Because we tend to have more tasks controlled by specific brain areas
(speech for example), there is an associated critical vulnerability
should the brain suffer localised damage due to infarction/TIA. Damage
to the speech centre can result in almost total loss of the capability.
For a woman this is less likely to happen due to the way speech is
processed (i.e. relying less on a dedicated area, and using more of the
remainder of the brain)

Spatial awareness in men is also vulnerable to loss in this way.
Although living without that is obviously less of an issue.

I think you're confused.

Then what we actually have is a communications failure ;-)

A good driver would never get into that position.

That does not hold true from experience I would say. There can be any
number of reasons why you may need to swerve sharply to avoid an obstacle
in the road. Even at low speeds a patch of oil on a road or black ice can
result in you car loosing grip at one end or the other. As can a tyre
unexpectedly deflating.


But a good driver would be aware of the possibility of all those things and
be prepared.

Exactly what I was saying.


Why do you think advanced drivers are expected to pass a course on skid
pan driving? As are many professional drivers like bus/coach drivers?


That's only part of the course - to make people into good drivers.

Indeed. Again, my point ;-)

I think that the ordinary driving test should be far more rigorous - to the
standards of the ASM. Those standards should be enforced. They never will be

There are certainly things that ought to be covered in the test that
currently are not.

though and people do all sorts of things which they know are illegal because

Or don't even know any better...

they know they can - as well as disagreeing with the law. They think they
know better.

Which by extension must be true in a small number of cases ;-)

Just because someone is trained to react to adversities and is made to take
more advanced driving courses neither makes them responsible nor good
drivers if they can't be bothered applying what they've learned.

True. Some things however become instinctive. Like learning to correct
an overstear. Once you have the skill you may have no opportunity to
practice it on a day to day basis. But when you need to do it, it should
happen "automatically".

Very many
bus and coach drivers use phones while driving and drive faster than the
limit.

I don't quite see what that has to do with skid pan driving?

So the majority of drivers aren't good drivers. That's what I've been
saying.

Probably true. Perhaps we are all different shades of "bad"?


I've seen lots of men drivers skidding on ice, I never have skidded on
ice.


Nor have I. And I've driven on ice quite a lot. I was once mocked by a

You seem to be replying to your own point there ;-)

driving instructor - the husband of a friend, who smirked when I was about
to set off outside his house, up a hill, on ice in our Moggie van(renowned
for lack of traction). He actually said, "Oh, this will be fun! Come and
watch this woman slide and skid all over." Of course I didn't, he could
never look me in the face again.

And I was glad that BSM - his employer - hadn't taught me to drive if that
attitude was allowed.

One instructor does not necessarily reflect the whole organisation though.

I had 11 lessons with BSM... I actually thought the instructor was very
good. Shortly after he left them and set up his own school with a
handful of other ex BSM guys. I booked another lesson on the day of my
test through the new school so I could keep the same instructor.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Doctor Evil wrote:

(in your mind)

..and everyone else's.

Nope, don't speak for me.

The Prius has the interior space of a Camry. It is no crawing, noisey,
smelly, slow, micro-hatch diesel, that can't pull the sheets off the bed.

What is the maximum bhp? How much does it weigh? Divide the first by the
second and now go find comparable power to weight ratio vehicles.

Not in exciting company is it?

No. Few cars and all pollution free vehicles. The hybrid is a stop gap,

So how are you going to get the people out of London then? That would
seem to be the only way you will significantly reduce the numbers of
cars. PT sure as hell is not going to make much dent in the problem.

before new technology comes along, which looks sooner rather than later.

Define "sooner"?

Sounds good. And have the bikes running of compressed air so no pollution
at all.

How do you compress the air?


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...


Then what we actually have is a communications failure ;-)

That's true.




I think that the ordinary driving test should be far more rigorous - to
the standards of the ASM. Those standards should be enforced. They never
will be

There are certainly things that ought to be covered in the test that
currently are not.

though and people do all sorts of things which they know are illegal
because

Or don't even know any better...

they know they can - as well as disagreeing with the law. They think they
know better.

Which by extension must be true in a small number of cases ;-)

And your point is?

It's OK to break the law?


Very many
bus and coach drivers use phones while driving and drive faster than the
limit.

I don't quite see what that has to do with skid pan driving?

The indication seemed to be that they had a higher standard of driving
because they had advanced training.

Probably true. Perhaps we are all different shades of "bad"?


I've seen lots of men drivers skidding on ice, I never have skidded on
ice.


Nor have I. And I've driven on ice quite a lot. I was once mocked by a

You seem to be replying to your own point there ;-)

I think communication has broken down again.

driving instructor - the husband of a friend, who smirked when I was
about to set off outside his house, up a hill, on ice in our Moggie van
(renowned for lack of traction). He actually said, "Oh, this will be fun!
Come and watch this woman slide and skid all over." Of course I didn't,
he could never look me in the face again.

And I was glad that BSM - his employer - hadn't taught me to drive if
that attitude was allowed.

One instructor does not necessarily reflect the whole organisation though.

Of course not, but if he hadn't been trained in personal communication
skills he wasn't going to be trusted by pupils, was he? If he hadn't been
trained it's an indication that none of them is trained in that skill.

I had 11 lessons with BSM... I actually thought the instructor was very
good. Shortly after he left them and set up his own school with a handful
of other ex BSM guys. I booked another lesson on the day of my test
through the new school so I could keep the same instructor.

I had one lesson with a BSM instructor. She sat next to me chewing sweets
all through, saying nothing until the end when she said I wasn't ready for a
test yet.

That's not instructing.

So my experience of BSM was 100% unfortunate - to say the least.

I had one lesson with a local instructor who, after I'd driven half way down
the street from our house, said he was going to put me in for a test the
following week, he had a cancellation. I passed. It's a more complicated
story than that but they're irrelevant - if interesting. To me.

That was in the Those Days of course, things are different now.

Mary

Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point. Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case) required to charge it in a
minute.

Now a low powered electric car, say capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity. If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want to recharge those in 1 min?

That would require 144000 amps at 50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

What do you propose using as a charger? A small thermonuclear device
perhaps?


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm" stupidly wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point.
Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy
enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case)
required to charge it in a minute.

Toshiba say:
"Toshiba will bring the new rechargeable battery to commercial products in
2006. Initial applications will be in the automotive and industrial sectors,
where the slim, small-sized battery will deliver large amounts of energy
while requiring only a minute to recharge. For example, the battery's
advantages in size, weight and safety highly suit it for a role as an
alternative power source for hybrid electric vehicles. "

Now a low powered electric car, say
capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity.
If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at
least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal
voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want
to recharge those in 1 min?

That would be nice and Toshbia say they can do that.

That would require 144000 amps at
50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

That may be the case. But special charging stations would be about to do
that, like we have petrol stations. They could be trickle charged, in
comparison, via a domestic system.

What do you propose using as a charger?

Have you asked Toshiba about this?

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

(in your mind)

..and everyone else's.

Nope, don't speak for me.

The Prius has the interior space of a Camry. It is no crawing, noisey,
smelly, slow, micro-hatch diesel, that can't pull the sheets off the
bed.

What is the maximum bhp? How much does it weigh? Divide the first by the
second and now go find comparable power to weight ratio vehicles.

See the Toyota web site.

Not in exciting company is it?

It is. The results are that give gives 55-65mpg, and is a smooth a sewing
machine, and minimum pollution cities, Just brill.

No. Few cars and all pollution free vehicles.
The hybrid is a stop gap,

So how are you going to get the
people out of London then?

Have you asked Ken?

That would seem to be the only way
you will significantly reduce the numbers of
cars.

Ken charges them. That is one way.

PT sure as hell is not going to
make much dent in the problem.

Charging and banning them will.

before new technology comes along, which looks sooner rather than later.

Define "sooner"?

Before later.

Sounds good. And have the bikes running
of compressed air so no pollution at all.

How do you compress the air?

With a compressor. Didn't you know that. You don't use a hand pump, althogh
you could.

Mary Fisher wrote:

they know they can - as well as disagreeing with the law. They think they
know better.

Which by extension must be true in a small number of cases ;-)


And your point is?

It's OK to break the law?

"OK" as in the lesser of too evils... I can think of a few cases where
it is. I am sure you can.

However I was not talking about the legality particularly, more a case
that in some situations they will know better (i.e. local knowledge and
experience may trump blanket policy set by a civil serpent in Whitehall).

I don't quite see what that has to do with skid pan driving?


The indication seemed to be that they had a higher standard of driving
because they had advanced training.

I was suggesting they had a higher standard of training. Also that
control of car dynamics "beyond the norm" was hence considered a
desirable skill for a professional driver.

What happens after that training is over however, is partly down to the
individual.

That was in the Those Days of course, things are different now.

Might I ask when?


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Doctor Evil wrote:

Note: CVT = pullies and belts.

CVT is any arrangement that allows the final gear ratio between drive
and wheels to be varied in a continuous way.

A planetary gear system is a form of CVT as is a differential.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Note: CVT = pullies and belts.

CVT is any arrangement that allows the final gear ratio between drive
and wheels to be varied in a continuous way.

Yep.

A planetary gear system is a form of CVT as is a differential.

Not in the context these were on about. A planetary system has NO steps, or
complex belts and pullies. Rather different to say the least. Just a
cluster running an a bearing - very different.

Doctor Evil wrote:

The Prius has the interior space of a Camry. It is no crawing, noisey,
smelly, slow, micro-hatch diesel, that can't pull the sheets off the

bed.

What is the maximum bhp? How much does it weigh? Divide the first by the
second and now go find comparable power to weight ratio vehicles.


See the Toyota web site.


Not in exciting company is it?


It is. The results are that give gives 55-65mpg, and is a smooth a sewing
machine, and minimum pollution cities, Just brill.

Your phrase was "can't pull the sheets off the bed". 60 bhp/tonne puts
it into exactly that category....

So how are you going to get the
people out of London then?


Have you asked Ken?

Like he would know...

before new technology comes along, which looks sooner rather than later.

Define "sooner"?


Before later.

20 years, 50 years?

Sounds good. And have the bikes running
of compressed air so no pollution at all.

How do you compress the air?


With a compressor. Didn't you know that. You don't use a hand pump, althogh
you could.

Which consumes energy and creates pollution... so the "no pollution at
all" statement is as clueless as most of what you spout.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

Recharge in a minute or so?

How many Amps is that

Maxie, again you think you know it all. Are you taking Mr Cranium pills?
You should know better than lunatic Richard.

Just for you Maxie:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Go and get your elusive envelope and work out how much energy you need
to put into the batteries, then work out the current required to deliver
that in a couple of minutes

You don't find joined up thinking easy do you ?

--
geoff

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

The indication seemed to be that they had a higher standard of driving
because they had advanced training.

I was suggesting they had a higher standard of training.

But if it doesn't result in a better standard of driving what's the point?

Also that control of car dynamics "beyond the norm" was hence considered a
desirable skill for a professional driver.

Car dynamics? Bus drivers were mentioned ...

What happens after that training is over however, is partly down to the
individual.

Exactly.

That was in the Those Days of course, things are different now.

Might I ask when?

1970 ± 2

I'd been driving various vehicles, legally, for twenty years by then.

Mary

"Doctor Evil" wrote:

I need a car that can be town and Mway and trunk road and carry 4/5
passengers in comfort and is not a death trap and helps save the planet.
You see that is why I bought the Prius.

What happens when it fails, do you have a second one in reserve?

What the hell is 4/5 of a passenger, you been playing with sharp
knives again?


--

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:09:13 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


Quite possibly, and I applaud good / clever engineering design, but
what has that got to do with anything?

Well you are talking tech and how it works and along with Mr Cranium were
musing about batteries etc, and saying the Pruis couldn't actually work and
do what it did. Now you think it is all irrelevant.

Eh? Here's a new word for you to fit between the two I think you know
already (black and white) and that's grey. With you it seems it's
either perfect (Prius) or crap (everything else ever invented). I know
(and how) batteries and motors work (I have owned an EV for 16 years)
and engined / gearbox vehicles for 30 and there is good and bad in all
of them. Pros for the EV are no MOT, road Tax, quiet to drive and
very simple to maintain. The con's are that it has limited range, is
slow (and before you get all excited and snip happy I'm talking about
MY EV here) and is NOT pollution free in spite of it not having a
hybrid engine or otherwise. I don't go into London with it (or
anything) so congestion charging and parking aren't an issue to me.

It could you Borg nanobot
technology for all I care or Flux Capacitors
for that matter, it's the
pollutants / mile that count in the end?

It is the mpg and emissions that count, for the size of the vehicle with the
performance of cars in that class.

Indeed .. and what I said with 'pollutants / mile'. By definition the
less fuel you burn the less pollutants and the better mpg.

People just don't understand it, yet
the Prius is simpler than a normal
engine/auto trans setup.

Indeed, and my EV is simpler still, so what?

What do you mean so what?

If it's simplicity you wan't get a wheelbarrow. You seemed to be
trying to make a point that your Prius was "simpler than a normal
engine / trans setup". Simple isn't always best, you could get the
cork out of a bottle with a std screw in corkscrew, a pnumatic or
lever type are more complex but do the job easier? Simple isn't always
better (as you often demonstrate).


Great, I wonder how far your Prius wil get on a battery of 600mAh
cells ;-)

I don't know, but that is not the point.

The fact that there is a lot you don't know is very much the point.

Ok, a challenge for you (if you are up to it) .. try to answer these
questions with the options provided and no snipping ok?

Q1) The batteries on your Pirus only allow the vehicle to run with no
(instant) emmisions for (say) 6 miles.
Yes / No

Q2) After the 6 mile distance your Pirus uses a petrol engine to
propell the vehicle and or charge the battery?
Yes / No

Q3) When the engine is running it is creating local pollution.
Yes / No

Q4) If you happen to get in the city with a flat battery the engine
can charge the battery whilst parked outside (say) a childerens
hospital?
Yes / No

Q5) If you drive 5 miles into a city on battery and to drive out again
you will be running on the engine creating local pollution.
Yes / No


Want to resd this bit again (or for the first time probably).

Ok, let's say they actually produced a battery of this
ability the laws of physics still apply (wether you
want to accept it or not) and they are.

1) You need a certian amount of energy to accellerate (even if that's
done slowly) a mass to a speed.

2) You need a certian amount of energy to maintain that speed (wind
resistance / frictional losses)

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does not work, then have you contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting their time?

No point,

1) I don't care
2) I have no doubt battery technology is improving (cost / energy
density / environmental issues / charge - discharge times / cycle life
/ durability etc) there are often other issues (like self detonation
// meltdown) that need resolving.

So, if you need to accellerate your Prius (whatever it weights) up to
a speed (in whatever the time) that will take Y energy. So, the
batteries needed to do that would need Y x range = Z

To charge a battery in 1 min would talke thousands of amps (don't
bother taking yer socks off) and trust me, yer domestic power supply
won't do that.

The domestic supply would trickle charge.

Good boy ..

Charging centres would zap an
auto battery in a few minutes.

Would they now ..

Using existing battery technology, batteries
can only absorb so much brake regen and much energy is wasted.

Yes, because the process is chemical and that chemical reaction isn't
'fast' to react.

The Toshiba
batteries promise to claw back most, if not all, of the brake regen energy.

Promises promises ... Recouping regen energy has already been done by
(for example) imparting the braking energy into a large flywheel or
pnumatic pressure cyl to release when needed later on. QAnd why are we
now looking at regen braking. This is only of any real advantage when
decellerating from high speeds / long dowhill's .. I thought the
Prius was a city car?

So, this battery scores on clawing back energy, fast re-charges and promised
large energy storage

Promised ..

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does not work, then have you contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting their time on this?

Could you do it for me ?

Then ask nurse to pull the covers over. Don't guess or make things up,
or
quote ridiculous tests based on dragsters, like the looney.

Eh, I said " So, if you need to accellerate your Prius (whatever it
weights) up to a speed (in whatever the time) that will take Y energy.
So, the batteries needed to do that would need Y x range = Z"

You see the word 'accellerate' and your little ring goes?

*I* have never been interested in 060 figures .. however, there are
mimimus that all vehicles should comply if you can get the drivers to
use them (like the minimum CC for vehicles on the motorway or min
speed in tunnels etc).


Great, enjoy your 50 mpg

Thank you, 55 actually and I drive mixed town and fast road. Many get over
60mpg average.

Great, something for you to espire to then?

.. I'll do the same or better in any number
of much cheaper and more practical offerings?

Not in the size of the Prius you will not - remember I told you not to make
things up like the loony.

We wont ;-)

And you do not have the ultra low emissions of
the Prius either,

Some figures quoted suggest they 'aren't that low?

and super smooth transmission.

Ok, so you accellerate (that means 'progressivly get faster', nothing
to do with dragsters) all nice and gently .. smoother than a silky
smooth thing and then you have to stop quickly.

The Prius is worth getting
for the absence of the gearbox alone. Superb drive. When on only batteries,
the drive is uncanny.

I had better start saving then .. if you say it's a 'must have'!

Cheaper offerings. Do the calcs.

Ok, calculator on.

Every day in central London saving £8 a

Don't drive into London, daily or otherwise

day on congestion and parking,

do,'t go so don't need to park. If I did I'd go in my motorbile, no
congestion charge or parking cost

then the amazing mpg.

Amazing, probably 20 mpg worse than my Honda CB250.

Must be say £20 a day
saved @ 5 per week @ 48 weeks a year, which is £4,800 alone, then that will
be over £5K per ann.

Or in my case the cost and depreciation of pointless vehicle? Out of
intrest, what do they state for caravan noseweigts for towing with the
Prius?

Then the cheaper servicing as the electric components
are service free. Doesn't take long to claw back the costs does it.

Nope, I have always serviced my own vehicles. Let's see, on the Rover,
Oil filter 92p, air filter £3.80 and a gallon of oil £5?

See why there is a waiting list?

Nope. Nope, but I understand why there could be .. mind you, Clarkson
had to wait 18 months for is Ford GT40 (or whatever it was) .. still
breaks down and is useless in the city (apart from bad for the city or
anywhere) as it's too wide.

You might find this artical interesting though ..

http://www.zyra.org.uk/battery.htm

Not bad, but out of date with nothing on Lith Poly,

Probably not, uit in big colourful writing in an easy to read form?

from what I initially
saw, and the new Toshiba, of which you only got to know from me.

Yeah, thanks mate, I've bookmarked it (honest).

The point
is that battery technology over the past few years has really come along,
and shows strong signs of changing the propulsion units in cars to electric
drive of some sort.

Lets hope ..

More work on lighter bodies, more efficient motors
(some scope left in this)

I *think* the first EV predate the first petrol car so nothing is new
here in either.

and batteries (promises a hell of alot) and the
stdard production all electric EV car is not that far off.

Ok .. in the early 80's IBM came out with the PC. Base unit containing
a motherboard, CPU, RAM etc and a floppy drive. External monitor and
keyboard. 25 years later what has changed .. ok we now have mice,
CD/DVD and they run quicker?

Petrol car, 4 pistons, petrol in, exhaust out ... electric cart,
battery, motor .. , Wright Brothers, aeroplane, wings, engine .. no
anti gravity or time travel .. get the idea?

Once the basic concept has been 'invented' it often takes the
invention of something *completely* new before we take another giant
leap. If you had brought to our attention a new battery with 1000 x
the capacity of existing batteries we might be interested, you didn't,
we aren't.

All the best ..

T i m

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:06:21 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Rumm" stupidly wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point.
Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy
enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case)
required to charge it in a minute.

Toshiba say:
"Toshiba will bring the new rechargeable battery to commercial products in
2006. Initial applications will be in the automotive and industrial sectors,
where the slim, small-sized battery will deliver large amounts of energy
while requiring only a minute to recharge. For example, the battery's
advantages in size, weight and safety highly suit it for a role as an
alternative power source for hybrid electric vehicles. "

Now a low powered electric car, say
capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity.
If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at
least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal
voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want
to recharge those in 1 min?

That would be nice and Toshbia say they can do that.

Toshiba may be a very credible company, but even they can't defy the
laws of physics.



That would require 144000 amps at
50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

That may be the case. But special charging stations would be about to do
that, like we have petrol stations. They could be trickle charged, in
comparison, via a domestic system.

What do you propose using as a charger?

Have you asked Toshiba about this?


This would be a problem similar to the energy requirements of the
Joint European Torus. I visited their site at Culham some years ago,
and the energy requirements are huge. When the experiment was run,
the bulk of the output of Didcot power station (2000MW) was used to do
so, and this was still insufficient, so they had a system with massive
heavy flywheels run up to a substantial speed and then having their
energy delivered rapidly to the experiment.

This is obviously larger than the battery issue, but somehow it is
rather difficult to imagine the local Shell station having power
provisioning to deliver around 100MW to the charging points.

The cables would be rather on the large side as well.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article ,
Huge wrote:
Heh heh. Bring back the Mobile economy run, I say.

Mobil. And it never went away - just changed it's name.

Right. Since you're pulling me up on my spelling, I'll do the same for
your punctuation. ;-)

Used to be fascinating
to see vast barges of cars doing phenomenal MPG. But despite all the
complaints about fuel costs, few drive for best economy.

Indeed. All cars come equipped with a very effective economy device. It's
attached to the end of the driver's right leg.

Yup.

--
*I started out with nothing... and I still have most of it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Mary Fisher wrote:

But if it doesn't result in a better standard of driving what's the point?

Sometimes it will though...

Just because some drivers will develop bad habbits later is that any
reason to not train them properly in the first place?

Also that control of car dynamics "beyond the norm" was hence considered a
desirable skill for a professional driver.


Car dynamics? Bus drivers were mentioned ...

Vehicle if you prefer.

Might I ask when?


1970 ï½± 2

I was about to say I remember it well... but in fact I don't ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Matt wrote:

What the hell is 4/5 of a passenger, you been playing with sharp
knives again?

He was refering to mental capacity when he is driving alone.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

T i m wrote:

Q4) If you happen to get in the city with a flat battery the engine
can charge the battery whilst parked outside (say) a childerens
hospital?

In fact since it uses differential speed of the petrol and electric
motors to provide the CVT transmission it probably won't work at all
without battery power (or at least would be stuck with one fixed ratio).

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 22:35:51 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

T i m wrote:

Q4) If you happen to get in the city with a flat battery the engine
can charge the battery whilst parked outside (say) a childerens
hospital?

In fact since it uses differential speed of the petrol and electric
motors to provide the CVT transmission it probably won't work at all
without battery power (or at least would be stuck with one fixed ratio).

I would have hoped that it would cope John, being the "Ultimate
driving machine" etc?

If one was driving battery only (because you were in a City centre)
and exhausted the battery I would assume the battery management system
would insist the batteries were above a certian charge threshold
before enery was drawn from them again?

Therefore the transmission *should* be able cope seamlessly?

Maybe Drivel can send us a copy of the technical manual (don't suppose
he needs it). Probably busy sticking Prius posters up on his bedroom
wall as we speak ;-)

All the best ..

T i m

In article ,
T i m wrote:
If one was driving battery only (because you were in a City centre)
and exhausted the battery I would assume the battery management system
would insist the batteries were above a certian charge threshold
before enery was drawn from them again?

IIRC, the engine will start regardless if the batteries get too low.
Assuming you've filled the tank. ;-)

--
*Hard work has a future payoff. Laziness pays off NOW.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:36:40 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
If one was driving battery only (because you were in a City centre)
and exhausted the battery I would assume the battery management system
would insist the batteries were above a certian charge threshold
before enery was drawn from them again?

IIRC, the engine will start regardless if the batteries get too low.
Assuming you've filled the tank. ;-)

Even in EV mode?

T i m

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

The Prius has the interior space of a Camry. It is no crawing, noisey,
smelly, slow, micro-hatch diesel, that can't pull the sheets off the
bed.

What is the maximum bhp? How much does it weigh? Divide the first by the
second and now go find comparable power to weight ratio vehicles.

See the Toyota web site.

Not in exciting company is it?

It is. The results are that give gives 55-65mpg, and is a smooth as a
sewing
machine, and minimum pollution in cities, Just brill.

Your phrase was "can't pull the sheets off the bed". 60 bhp/tonne puts
it into exactly that category....

Certainly not. it has enough performance.

So how are you going to get the
people out of London then?

Have you asked Ken?

Like he would know...

He is mayor..

before new technology comes along, which looks sooner rather than
later.

Define "sooner"?

Before later.

20 years, 50 years?

More like 5 to 10.

Sounds good. And have the bikes running
of compressed air so no pollution at all.

How do you compress the air?

With a compressor. Didn't you know that. You don't use a hand pump,
althogh
you could.

Which consumes energy and creates pollution... so the "no pollution at
all" statement is as clueless as most of what you spout.

You take the pollution away from the cities where it does most harm. Get
it? Nah, you don't.

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D
are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba
have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

Recharge in a minute or so?

How many Amps is that

Maxie, again you think you know it all. Are you taking Mr Cranium pills?
You should know better than lunatic Richard.

Just for you Maxie:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Go and get your elusive envelope and work out how much energy you need
to put into the batteries, then work out the current required to deliver
that in a couple of minutes

You don't find joined up thinking easy do you ?

Maxie, have notified Toshiba about this? Have you tested this sort of thing
in your enchanted workshop?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Evil" wrote:

I need a car that can be town and Mway and trunk road and carry 4/5
passengers in comfort and is not a death trap and helps save the planet.
You see that is why I bought the Prius.

What happens when it fails,

Get it fixed. That is what most do don't they. Do you just throw them away?

do you have a second one in reserve?

What the hell is 4/5 of a passenger, you been playing with sharp
knives again?

My God, another one.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:09:13 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


Quite possibly, and I applaud good / clever engineering design, but
what has that got to do with anything?

Well you are talking tech and how it
works and along with Mr Cranium were
musing about batteries etc, and saying
the Pruis couldn't actually work and
do what it did. Now you think it is all irrelevant.

Eh? Here's a new word for you to fit
between the two I think you know
already (black and white) and that's grey.
With you it seems it's either perfect (Prius)
or crap (everything else ever invented).

Here is a word for you - confused.

I know (and how) batteries and motors
work (I have owned an EV for 16 years)

Your knowledge of batteries is lacking. You didn't even know about the
Toshiba battery and the housewives guide to batteries web site was joke.

and engined / gearbox vehicles for 30
and there is good and bad in all
of them. Pros for the EV are no MOT,
road Tax, quiet to drive and
very simple to maintain. The con's
are that it has limited range, is
slow (and before you get all excited
and snip happy I'm talking about
MY EV here) and is NOT pollution
free in spite of it not having a
hybrid engine or otherwise. I don't go
into London with it (or anything) so
congestion charging and parking aren't
an issue to me.

That is an EV not a hybrid, and limited by the battery technology, also your
motor probably will not the latest in efficiency either. Your EV will do
better with a superior battery set, like those a Californian company are
putting in Prius'.

It is the mpg and emissions that count,
for the size of the vehicle with the
performance of cars in that class.

Indeed .. and what I said with 'pollutants / mile'. By definition the
less fuel you burn the less pollutants and the better mpg.

You don't say. The Prius burn less in cities where you don't want large
emissions.

People just don't understand it, yet
the Prius is simpler than a normal
engine/auto trans setup.

Indeed, and my EV is simpler still, so what?

What do you mean so what?

If it's simplicity you wan't get a wheelbarrow.

Silly statement.

You seemed to be trying to make
a point that your Prius was "simpler
than a normal engine / trans setup".

and that it is.

Simple isn't always best,

In this case it is.

you could get the cork out of a
bottle with a std screw in corkscrew,
a pnumatic or lever type are more complex
but do the job easier? Simple isn't always
better (as you often demonstrate).

You are confused. The Prius does the same job as similar cars, yet is
"simpler", consumes "far" less fuel, is quieter, and emits "far" less
pollutants, especially in areas where the need to kept down as in cities.
Get it?

Great, I wonder how far your Prius wil get on a battery of 600mAh
cells ;-)

I don't know, but that is not the point.

The fact that there is a lot you don't
know is very much the point.

I know exactly what the Prius does. I have one. You can get to know if you
want to, and not even own one.

Ok, a challenge for you (if you are up to it) .. try to answer these
questions with the options provided and no snipping ok?

Q1) The batteries on your Pirus only allow the vehicle to run with no
(instant) emmisions for (say) 6 miles.
Yes / No

Q2) After the 6 mile distance your Pirus uses a petrol engine to
propell the vehicle and or charge the battery?
Yes / No

Q3) When the engine is running it is creating local pollution.
Yes / No

Q4) If you happen to get in the city with a flat battery the engine
can charge the battery whilst parked outside (say) a childerens
hospital?
Yes / No

Q5) If you drive 5 miles into a city on battery and to drive out again
you will be running on the engine creating local pollution.
Yes / No

Want to resd this bit again (or for the first time probably).

The Prius emits far less pollution in built up areas with brake regen
assisting recharge. The engine is tuned for low pollution. It is revved to
over 1000rpm before the injection and ignition systems kick in, reducing
pollution, as low rev start-up creates far more pollution. The engine is
"off" when the cars is still (kerbside pollution is a big killer in cities).
When the low emissions engine kicks in it is assisted by the electric motor
reducing pollution. I have never know the engine to start by itself to
charge batteries when the car is switched off (it do, but never happened
with me). The management system ensures the battery never goes below a
certain charge and will adjust the power splitter (engine to
wheels/generator to ensure the minium charge).

There you are.

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does not work, then have you
contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting their time?

No point,

Exactly. They will laugh at you.

1) I don't care
2) I have no doubt battery technology is improving (cost / energy
density / environmental issues / charge - discharge times / cycle life
/ durability etc) there are often other issues (like self detonation
// meltdown) that need resolving.

Have told Toshiba about these?

So, if you need to accellerate your Prius (whatever it weights) up to
a speed (in whatever the time) that will take Y energy. So, the
batteries needed to do that would need Y x range = Z

To charge a battery in 1 min would talke thousands of amps (don't
bother taking yer socks off) and trust me, yer domestic power supply
won't do that.

The domestic supply would trickle charge.

Good boy ..

Charging centres would zap an
auto battery in a few minutes.

Would they now ..

So Toshiba say. Have you told Toshiba this will not work?

Using existing battery technology, batteries
can only absorb so much brake regen and
much energy is wasted.

Yes, because the process is chemical
and that chemical reaction isn't 'fast' to react.

That is why Toshiba introduced another battery.

The Toshiba batteries promise to claw
back most, if not all, of the brake regen energy.

Promises promises ... Recouping regen
energy has already been done by
(for example) imparting the braking energy
into a large flywheel or pnumatic pressure
cyl to release when needed later on.

Also compressing air and using it to propel via an air motor.

QAnd why are we now looking at regen braking.

Top claw back wasted energy.

This is only of any real advantage when
decellerating from high speeds / long dowhill's

No, it is an advantage in all braking.

.. I thought the
Prius was a city car?

The Prius is "not" just a city car, it performs well on all roads.

So, this battery scores on clawing back energy,
fast re-charges and promised
large energy storage

Promised ..

Have you told Toshiba about their promises?

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does
not work, then have you contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting
their time on this?

Could you do it for me ?

No.

Then ask nurse to pull the covers over.
Don't guess or make things up,
or quote ridiculous tests based on
dragsters, like the looney.

Eh, I said " So, if you need to accellerate
your Prius (whatever it weights) up to a
speed (in whatever the time) that will take
Y energy. So, the batteries needed to do
that would need Y x range = Z"

You see the word 'accellerate' and your
little ring goes?

That is all nice to know but meaningless in the performance, emissions and
economy of the Prius from an owners view.

Great, enjoy your 50 mpg

Thank you, 55 actually and I drive
mixed town and fast road. Many get over
60mpg average.

Great, something for you to espire to then?

Positive thinking from you. Encoutaging.

.. I'll do the same or better in any number
of much cheaper and more practical offerings?

Not in the size of the Prius you will not -
remember I told you not to make
things up like the loony.

We wont ;-)

And you do not have the ultra low emissions of
the Prius either,

Some figures quoted suggest they 'aren't that low?

Far lower than any IC engine cars that is for sure, and very low in city
driving. Kerbside pollution is eliminated.

and super smooth transmission.

Ok, so you accellerate (that means
'progressivly get faster', nothing
to do with dragsters) all nice and gently
.. smoother than a silky
smooth thing and then you have to stop quickly.

...and?

The Prius is worth getting
for the absence of the gearbox alone.
Superb drive. When on only batteries,
the drive is uncanny.

I had better start saving then
.. if you say it's a 'must have'!

It is a must have.

Cheaper offerings. Do the calcs.

Ok, calculator on.

Every day in central London saving £8 a

Don't drive into London, daily or otherwise

Savings are less then.

day on congestion and parking,

do,'t go so don't need to park. If
I did I'd go in my motorbile, no
congestion charge or parking cost

If you went in a Prius that would have no congestion charge or parking too,
and you don't get wet or killed easy.

then the amazing mpg.

Amazing, probably 20 mpg worse than my Honda CB250.

We looking at cars, not death traps. You are confused.

Must be say £20 a day
saved @ 5 per week @ 48 weeks a
year, which is £4,800 alone, then that will
be over £5K per ann.

Or in my case the cost and depreciation
of pointless vehicle?

Your bike is pointless.

Out of intrest, what do they state for
caravan noseweigts for towing with the
Prius?

I don't know, I am not a Tinker.

Then the cheaper servicing as
the electric components
are service free. Doesn't take long
to claw back the costs does it.

Nope, I have always serviced my
own vehicles.

We are talking generally. The average motorist does not service. Also if
you DIYed a Prius they is little to do.

See why there is a waiting list?

Nope.

You are confused.

Nope, but I understand why there
could be .. mind you, Clarkson
had to wait 18 months for is Ford GT40
(or whatever it was) .. still breaks down

You are confused. he is on about a fat irritating TV man now.

You might find this artical interesting though ..

http://www.zyra.org.uk/battery.htm

Not bad, but out of date with nothing on Lith Poly,

Probably not, uit in big colourful writing in an easy to read form?

It is useless if you want to know about the latest in batteries. Good for
the housewife.

from what I initially saw, and the
new Toshiba, of which you only got to know from me.

Yeah, thanks mate, I've bookmarked it (honest).

Good.

The point
is that battery technology over the past few years has really come along,
and shows strong signs of changing the propulsion units in cars to
electric
drive of some sort.

Lets hope ..

More work on lighter bodies, more efficient motors
(some scope left in this)

I *think* the first EV predate the first petrol car so nothing is new
here in either.

and batteries (promises a hell of alot) and the
stdard production all electric EV car is not that far off.

Ok .. in the early 80's IBM came out with
the PC.

That they reluctantly did..

Base unit containing
a motherboard, CPU, RAM etc and a floppy drive. External monitor and
keyboard. 25 years later what has changed .. ok we now have mice,
CD/DVD and they run quicker?

Laptops integrate the lot. GUI OSs. A lot has changed.

Petrol car, 4 pistons, petrol in, exhaust out ... electric cart,
battery, motor .. , Wright Brothers, aeroplane, wings, engine .. no
anti gravity or time travel .. get the idea?

Nope. You are confused.

Once the basic concept has been
'invented' it often takes the
invention of something *completely*
new before we take another giant
leap. If you had brought to our attention
a new battery with 1000 x the capacity
of existing batteries we might be interested, you didn't,
we aren't.

It is clear you ignorant of developments and hybrid technology...and
confused. Sad but true.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:06:21 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Rumm" stupidly wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point.
Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy
enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case)
required to charge it in a minute.

Toshiba say:
"Toshiba will bring the new rechargeable battery to commercial products
in
2006. Initial applications will be in the automotive and industrial
sectors,
where the slim, small-sized battery will deliver large amounts of energy
while requiring only a minute to recharge. For example, the battery's
advantages in size, weight and safety highly suit it for a role as an
alternative power source for hybrid electric vehicles. "

Now a low powered electric car, say
capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity.
If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at
least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal
voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want
to recharge those in 1 min?

That would be nice and Toshbia say they can do that.

Toshiba may be a very credible
company, but even they can't defy the
laws of physics.

Have you told them they are wrong?

That would require 144000 amps at
50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

That may be the case. But special charging stations would be about to do
that, like we have petrol stations. They could be trickle charged, in
comparison, via a domestic system.

What do you propose using as a charger?

Have you asked Toshiba about this?

This would be a problem similar to the energy requirements of the
Joint European Torus. I visited their site at Culham some years ago,
and the energy requirements are huge. When the experiment was run,
the bulk of the output of Didcot power station (2000MW) was used to do
so, and this was still insufficient, so they had a system with massive
heavy flywheels run up to a substantial speed and then having their
energy delivered rapidly to the experiment.

This is obviously larger than the battery issue, but somehow it is
rather difficult to imagine the local Shell station having power
provisioning to deliver around 100MW to the charging points.

The cables would be rather on the large side as well.

You will have to tell Toshiba all about this. The prime point is that most,
if not all, of the brake regen energy will be reclaimed. The batteries can
be recharged far quicker than the current types, to the limited of the
supplying system.

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Matt wrote:

What the hell is 4/5 of a passenger, you been playing with sharp
knives again?

He was refering to mental capacity when he is driving alone.

Wow such wit - Essex humour of course.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:57:37 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

snip
Yes. They'll be wonderful when we get renewable electricity. Which will
probably be never. And burning a fossil fuel in a power station to charge
*any* battery is far less efficient than using that fuel directly to power
the vehicle.
snip

A COGAS system (Gas turbine with waste heat recovery) will have an
efficiency slightly better than 50%. A slow speed diesel with waste
heat recovery also will exceed 50% efficiency. Steam turbine system
that provide the bulk of power have efficiencies closer to 30%.

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 07:37:02 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:06:21 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Rumm" stupidly wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point.
Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy
enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case)
required to charge it in a minute.

Toshiba say:
"Toshiba will bring the new rechargeable battery to commercial products
in
2006. Initial applications will be in the automotive and industrial
sectors,
where the slim, small-sized battery will deliver large amounts of energy
while requiring only a minute to recharge. For example, the battery's
advantages in size, weight and safety highly suit it for a role as an
alternative power source for hybrid electric vehicles. "

Now a low powered electric car, say
capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity.
If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at
least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal
voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want
to recharge those in 1 min?

That would be nice and Toshbia say they can do that.

Toshiba may be a very credible
company, but even they can't defy the
laws of physics.

Have you told them they are wrong?

No, because they are not. Their article is about charging a 500mAH
battery in one minute. This can be done quite easily.

You were trying to extrapolate this into being able to use the same
technology in the same way with a one minute charge in a full sized
car without thinking about the implications.

Patently, that can't practically work in this way on that scale - the
energy requirement is too large.




That would require 144000 amps at
50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

That may be the case. But special charging stations would be about to do
that, like we have petrol stations. They could be trickle charged, in
comparison, via a domestic system.

What do you propose using as a charger?

Have you asked Toshiba about this?

This would be a problem similar to the energy requirements of the
Joint European Torus. I visited their site at Culham some years ago,
and the energy requirements are huge. When the experiment was run,
the bulk of the output of Didcot power station (2000MW) was used to do
so, and this was still insufficient, so they had a system with massive
heavy flywheels run up to a substantial speed and then having their
energy delivered rapidly to the experiment.

This is obviously larger than the battery issue, but somehow it is
rather difficult to imagine the local Shell station having power
provisioning to deliver around 100MW to the charging points.

The cables would be rather on the large side as well.

You will have to tell Toshiba all about this. The prime point is that most,
if not all, of the brake regen energy will be reclaimed.

Yes, but this only covers so much of the requirement. These are not
perpetual motion machines.

The batteries can
be recharged far quicker than the current types, to the limited of the
supplying system.


That's a different situation entirely. The limitation will be the
charging system and the length of time that people will be prepared to
wait.

Nowadays people are used to going to a filling station, filling the
vehicle in about 2-3 minutes and away. They are not going to want to
hang around.

Further problems:

There is a limit to how much energy can be transferred in a reasonable
time, so it won't be worthwhile going to a charging station in the way
we go to a petrol station today.

Let's say that the venue is altered and the charging points are at
vehicle bays in supermarket car parks. Some in California have done
this, but talking to some friends with cars with batteries there, they
are not often used because it's not worth it for the amount of charge
that can be put into the battery.

Look at the situation again where the battery technology is not
limiting that rate of charge (in effect the Toshiba case). A
reasonable scenario with a supermarket charging point would be to be
able to replenish 20% of the battery capacity in 15 minutes. Using the
example above, this would mean about 1/75th of the requirement.
That's still 1920A at 50v or 96kW. At the 50v level, that would
imply cables that old ladies are certainly not going to be able to
lift. At AC mains level it would still imply heavy cables and a
chunky power supply in the car.


So the reality is that this technology may well result in better
recovery of energy from braking, but makes no difference to the
praticality of charging stations.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article ,
Edward W. Thompson wrote:
Yes. They'll be wonderful when we get renewable electricity. Which will
probably be never. And burning a fossil fuel in a power station to
charge *any* battery is far less efficient than using that fuel
directly to power the vehicle.
snip

A COGAS system (Gas turbine with waste heat recovery) will have an
efficiency slightly better than 50%. A slow speed diesel with waste
heat recovery also will exceed 50% efficiency. Steam turbine system
that provide the bulk of power have efficiencies closer to 30%.

Yes. And add in transmission losses via the grid, etc, then the much
higher losses involved in actually charging any battery. Add in the costs
of any high tech battery throughout its likely life, and it makes far more
sense to use that fuel directly - apart from any localised emissions issue.

--
*No radio - Already stolen.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 07:37:02 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:06:21 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Rumm" stupidly wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

As usual you are missing the point.
Charging a phone battery with 600mAh
capacity at 5V is one thing - it is easy
enough to build a domestic SMPS
that can supply the required 36A (best case)
required to charge it in a minute.

Toshiba say:
"Toshiba will bring the new rechargeable battery to commercial
products
in
2006. Initial applications will be in the automotive and industrial
sectors,
where the slim, small-sized battery will deliver large amounts of
energy
while requiring only a minute to recharge. For example, the battery's
advantages in size, weight and safety highly suit it for a role as an
alternative power source for hybrid electric vehicles. "

Now a low powered electric car, say
capable of 50kW maximum output, will
need batteries with more capacity.
If you are draining them at say an
average of 30kW and you want at
least 4 hours run time, that looks like
120kW/h capacity. Take a nominal
voltage - say 50 - that requires cells
with a 2400Ah capacity. Now you want
to recharge those in 1 min?

That would be nice and Toshbia say they can do that.

Toshiba may be a very credible
company, but even they can't defy the
laws of physics.

Have you told them they are wrong?

No, because they are not. Their article is about charging a 500mAH
battery in one minute. This can be done quite easily.

You were trying to extrapolate this into being able to use the same
technology in the same way with a one minute charge in a full sized
car without thinking about the implications.

Patently, that can't practically work in this way on that scale - the
energy requirement is too large.




That would require 144000 amps at
50V, and your own personal 7.2MW power
station.

That may be the case. But special charging stations would be about to
do
that, like we have petrol stations. They could be trickle charged, in
comparison, via a domestic system.

What do you propose using as a charger?

Have you asked Toshiba about this?

This would be a problem similar to the energy requirements of the
Joint European Torus. I visited their site at Culham some years ago,
and the energy requirements are huge. When the experiment was run,
the bulk of the output of Didcot power station (2000MW) was used to do
so, and this was still insufficient, so they had a system with massive
heavy flywheels run up to a substantial speed and then having their
energy delivered rapidly to the experiment.

This is obviously larger than the battery issue, but somehow it is
rather difficult to imagine the local Shell station having power
provisioning to deliver around 100MW to the charging points.

The cables would be rather on the large side as well.

You will have to tell Toshiba all about this. The prime point is that
most,
if not all, of the brake regen energy will be reclaimed.

Yes, but this only covers so much of the requirement. These are not
perpetual motion machines.

What are you on about?

The batteries can
be recharged far quicker than the current types, to the limited of the
supplying system.

That's a different situation entirely. The limitation will be the
charging system and the length of time that people will be prepared to
wait.

Nowadays people are used to going to a filling station, filling the
vehicle in about 2-3 minutes and away. They are not going to want to
hang around.

Most people spend about 10 minutes in a petrol shop.

Further problems:

There is a limit to how much energy can be transferred in a reasonable
time, so it won't be worthwhile going to a charging station in the way
we go to a petrol station today.

I was reading that large capacitors charged overnight could store energy to
zap batteries. I don't how much this is feasible.

Let's say that the venue is altered and the charging points are at
vehicle bays in supermarket car parks. Some in California have done
this, but talking to some friends with cars with batteries there, they
are not often used because it's not worth it for the amount of charge
that can be put into the battery.

Charging systems would change if the Toshiba battery became the norm.

Look at the situation again where the battery technology is not
limiting that rate of charge (in effect the Toshiba case). A
reasonable scenario with a supermarket charging point would be to be
able to replenish 20% of the battery capacity in 15 minutes. Using the
example above, this would mean about 1/75th of the requirement.
That's still 1920A at 50v or 96kW. At the 50v level, that would
imply cables that old ladies are certainly not going to be able to
lift. At AC mains level it would still imply heavy cables and a
chunky power supply in the car.

So the reality is that this technology may well result in better
recovery of energy from braking, but makes no difference to the
praticality of charging stations.

Reclaiming near 100% of brake energy is a great advantage. Charging systems
can made far superior to what is available. They will not stay the same.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Edward W. Thompson wrote:
Yes. They'll be wonderful when we get renewable electricity. Which will
probably be never. And burning a fossil fuel in a power station to
charge *any* battery is far less efficient than using that fuel
directly to power the vehicle.
snip

A COGAS system (Gas turbine with waste heat recovery) will have an
efficiency slightly better than 50%. A slow speed diesel with waste
heat recovery also will exceed 50% efficiency. Steam turbine system
that provide the bulk of power have efficiencies closer to 30%.

Yes. And add in transmission losses via the grid, etc, then the much
higher losses involved in actually charging any battery. Add in the costs
of any high tech battery throughout its likely life, and it makes far more
sense to use that fuel directly - apart from any localised emissions
issue.

He fails to see that distributed power generation is on the way, with the
first installation in East Manchester. Sad but true.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Toshiba may be a very credible
company, but even they can't defy the
laws of physics.

Have you told them they are wrong?

No, because they are not. Their article is about charging a 500mAH
battery in one minute. This can be done quite easily.

You were trying to extrapolate this into being able to use the same
technology in the same way with a one minute charge in a full sized
car without thinking about the implications.

Isn't that typical of the way Drivel treats any figures?

Patently, that can't practically work in this way on that scale - the
energy requirement is too large.

Practicality has rarely entered any of his posts.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.