geoff wrote:

they are not pollution free, you are merely shifting the pollution to
where its not seen

Maxie, thank you for your solid contribution. You have to read my other post
on this.You will enlightened and then send me all your worldly wealth the
delight will affect you so much. Fantastic Maxie. Fantastic.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

add in thirty six and you have the Marx brothers.

My God a snotty uni man knows about old films.

On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 00:24:18 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

BTW, what does a meter reader carry that he needs a van?

Nothing but the E.ON vans I see are the smallest cheapest most basic
van you can get. Being a van there are VAT implications that no doubt
the companies also take into account and possibly for the meter
reader if hehas use outside of working hours.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 04:29:14 -0800 (PST), Man at B&Q wrote:

Tanks of petrol are nasty, the vapour produced at normal
temperatures
will burn (explode) with a tiny source of ignition.r than fire.

We do not, however, deem them to be too unsafe to use in millions of
vehicles all over the worls.

'Tis true but then then our aversion to risk is really rather
perverse.

If some one produced something that was to kill around eight people
and injure say a thousand *a day* in the UK do you think it would be
allowed?

Yet on the flimiest of evidence a sensible person can't add a new
circuit to their hosue wiring which would eliminate the use of an
extension cable and multi adapter....

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:26:05 +0000, tony sayer wrote:

A car that is only capable of some 60 miles range without recharge is
about as useful as tits on a bull.

60 miles wouldn't even get me to the supermarket and back...

Probably OK for the vast amount of commuters in urban areas though,
even if they can only recharge overnight. Indeed thousands of cars
recharging during the day (when demand is high) is probably not a
good thing.

Compressed air brake regen would have been feasible, and air is
free,
but R&D in supercapacitors and batteries may have pushed air into
the
background for now.

Or even compressed air a "fuel". Saw a demo of a vehicle on the box a
while back but don't know it's range... Or even the use of liquified
air (or nitrogen) as "fuel".

Regen?, Perhaps some use around town for a Taxi but on a Motorway at
around the 70 limit?. Doesn't seem that practical..

Like the new super green bus for London that ran out of diesel when
driving up the motorway...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 23:06:07 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:

You will save money if you open an internet account.

They are already internet accounts.

I see a meter reader every five years or so.

I thought the companies had a legal obligation to read every six
months, that's certianly how often we see our the meter readers. If
they haven't read for 12 months they become quite persistent,
leaving cards and making appointments etc rather than just chancing
it.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I thought the companies had a legal obligation to read every six
months, that's certianly how often we see our the meter readers. If
they haven't read for12 months they become quite persistent,
leaving cards and making appointments etc rather than just chancing
it.

I usually make them wait several years at a time, eventually they do
insist (as they are legally allowed to) on a visit, this time it
coincided with them offering the smartmeters, so I decided if I was
staying home for them, they might as well fit new meters rather then
just read the old ones, electric had never been replaced before in the
22 years I've lived here, gas was changed 6 years ago.

geoff wrote:
In message , ARWadsworth
writes
Steve Firth wrote:
"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700
miles and can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a half.
Which electric vehicle should I be looking at?

One with a 700 mile extension lead?

But not a 699 mile, 4095 feet, 11.4 inches long, though

(0.6" being ~1.5cm)

Well said Maxie! Well said!! No doubt an eloquent person as yourself does
not drive a Ford.

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:29 am, Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride pollution free
vehicles and still think that choking, smoking diesels are OK

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if
you suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp.
Current car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a
wisp of smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories
of expensive replacements being required ... will have to see about
that if it comes to it.

The former is the EGR system. Expensive as well, but not as eye
watering as the DPF can be. Apparently there is a place in london that
will drill a sodding great hole through the DPF and remap the engine
as a "bodge".

My next car will not be a diesel.

Well said!

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:39 am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote:
On 22/02/2012 10:29, Andy Burns wrote:

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if
you suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp.
Current car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a
wisp of smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories
of expensive replacements being required ... will have to see about
that if it comes to it.

There you go again see... all a DPF does is store your soot from
pootling around waiting for you to get on the motorway and drive to
somon elses neck of the woods whereby the engine will throw unburned
fuel into the DPF to "clean" it out or more accurately create far
more pollution than a car without a DPF.


knobheads++

Well said!

Andy Burns wrote:

Current car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a
wisp of smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories
of expensive replacements being required

....and expensive turbos, etc. All a waste of polluting time.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

...and expensive turbos, etc. All a waste of polluting time.

I'd never buy a non-turbo diesel as my only car, if wanted a workabout
2nd vehicle maybe I'd consider an bombproof old diesel ...

On Feb 22, 9:31*pm, mick wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:20:52 -0800, Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does
invent one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater
capacity and costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great
limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

knobheads++

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

MBQ

Have you ever tried setting fire to diesel?

And your point is?

The discussion was about energy density, not flammability.

MBQ

On Feb 22, 5:20*pm, harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:

On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

There is other technology on the horizon.

Been here for years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor

Instant charging is possible.

No it isn't.

They are good as temporary storage for, e.g., regenerative braking,
but practically useless as primary storage.

higher charge/discharge rates are possible but energy density is much
lower.

MBQ

On Feb 23, 10:29*am, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:29 am, Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride pollution free
vehicles and still think that choking, smoking diesels are OK

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if
you suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp.
Current car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a
wisp of smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories
of expensive replacements being required ... will have to see about
that if it comes to it.

The former is the EGR system. Expensive as well, but not as eye
watering as the DPF can be. Apparently there is a place in london that
will drill a sodding great hole through the DPF and remap the engine
as a "bodge".

My next car will not be a diesel.

Well said!

Oh christ, I've been praised twice by Drivel.

MBQ

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Paul Herber wrote:
But in any case a very specialist application. Travels a short distance
with many start/stops. No other deliveries has the same pattern.
Post (well, 90% of local deliveries/collections)
They walk.

Meter readers
So do they.

Mine doesn't. Comes in a little EON van..

You live in a large town where an electric vehicle would make sense for
stop start work? As a milk float does?


No.

BTW, what does a meter reader carry that he needs a van?


A beer gut and stubby legs?

harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:00 pm, geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes





On Feb 22, 11:16 am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:
But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.
There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.
There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor
Instant charging is possible.
Oh dear harry, you really don't know when to let people think you are an
idiot rather than prove it time and again


It's you that's an idiot.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

shows nothing of relevance as to why a supercapacirir will ever be a
practical BEV energy source.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_c...#Disadvantages
which says

- The amount of energy stored per unit weight is generally lower than
that of an electrochemical battery (3€“5 W·h/kg for a standard
ultracapacitor, although 85 W.h/kg has been achieved in the lab[4] as of
2010 compared to 30€“40 W·h/kg for a lead acid battery), 100-250 W·h/kg
for a lithium-ion battery and about 1/1,000th the volumetric energy
density of gasoline.

This alone rules out supercapacitors for any practical use as car batteries.

- Has the highest dielectric absorption of any type of capacitor.
- High self-discharge €“ the rate is considerably higher than that of an
electrochemical battery.
- Low maximum voltage €“ series connections are needed to obtain higher
voltages, and voltage balancing may be required.
- Unlike practical batteries, the voltage across any capacitor,
including EDLCs, drops significantly as it discharges. Effective storage
and recovery of energy requires complex electronic control and switching
equipment, with consequent energy loss.
- Very low internal resistance allows extremely rapid discharge when
shorted, resulting in a spark hazard similar to any other capacitor of
similar voltage and capacitance (generally much higher than
electrochemical cells).

On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:33:54 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , geoff
wrote:

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article , geoff
wrote:

In message , ARWadsworth
writes
Steve Firth wrote:
"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City
and Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those
systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700
miles and can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a
half. Which electric vehicle should I be looking at?

One with a 700 mile extension lead?

But not a 699 mile, 4095 feet, 11.4 inches long, though
(0.6" being ~1.5cm)

What's 4096 ft?

Bugger, I meant 5279

there goes the imperial system

yeah. What is 4096?

4096 is 2**12 as ene skoolboy kno.

And the word size of my smallest desktop computer.



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 22/02/2012 06:31, Nthkentman wrote:

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Does that make the many councils and sub-contractors using EV knobheads
as well?

I would expect so... as a rate payer I would want to see a costed
breakdown to make sure they do not have a higher TCO than a diesel. I
have no interest in whether they promote a "green image" for the
council. (since they are generally far from green!)

Several major sub-contract companies I go to have EV for
transport and tasks up to 3.5 tonnes. Very useful they are too.

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for
decades to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs
lower and provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick
people knobheads too?

Don't think you are aiding the image of EVs with the milk float argument...

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?

Probably yes... do the benefits make up for the massive price premium
for the vehicle?

No, it's just people like you that provide links and derogatory
statements about technology you know little about because it doesn't fit
into your "Good old days" attitude lifestyle that are..

The technology is "ok" at best. However, unless backed by either better
battery technology (and that would need to be an order of magnitude
better), or a nationwide exchangeable battery system *and* a very
significant expansion in nuclear generation capacity, they are pretty
much pointless for the time being.

Right now petrol/diesel we have, spare generation capacity we don't - so
pure EVs can't be adopted in any serious numbers.

Perhaps the apprentices assisting the companies building them should be
shouted at more often, or sacked for not clearing the snow in the car
park so you can park your gas guzzler and given a thick ear to remind
them who's the boss eh.....

Luddite

Greenwash...


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:25:36 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:05:43 -0800 (PST), NT wrote:

700 miles in the real world, or descending a 700 mile high mountain?

My car has a 600 mile real world range brim to running on vapour.

With main and aux both full, 1453 miles on mine.

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:10:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

and it only needed one A & R visit to
put on plastic skin...

Did it happen in the middle of the road?

On Feb 23, 9:31*am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 23:06:07 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:
You will save money if you open an internet account.

They are already internet accounts.

I see a meter reader every five years or so.

I thought the companies had a legal obligation to read every six
months, that's certianly how often we see our the meter readers. If
they haven't read for 12 months they become quite persistent,
leaving cards and making appointments etc rather than just chancing
it.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Well it's possible they snuck in without me seeing, the meter is in an
outdoor enclosure.

On Feb 23, 11:21*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:00 pm, geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes

On Feb 22, 11:16 am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:
But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.
There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.
There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor
Instant charging is possible.
Oh dear harry, you really don't know when to let people think you are an
idiot rather than prove it time and again

It's you that's an idiot.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

shows nothing of relevance as to why a supercapacirir will ever be a
practical BEV energy source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_c...#Disadvantages
which says

- The amount of energy stored per unit weight is generally lower than
that of an electrochemical battery (3–5 W·h/kg for a standard
ultracapacitor, although 85 W.h/kg has been achieved in the lab[4] as of
2010 compared to 30–40 W·h/kg for a lead acid battery), 100-250 W·h/kg
for a lithium-ion battery and about 1/1,000th the volumetric energy
density of gasoline.

This alone rules out supercapacitors for any practical use as car batteries.

- Has the highest dielectric absorption of any type of capacitor.
- High self-discharge – the rate is considerably higher than that of an
electrochemical battery.
- Low maximum voltage – series connections are needed to obtain higher
voltages, and voltage balancing may be required.
- Unlike practical batteries, the voltage across any capacitor,
including EDLCs, drops significantly as it discharges. Effective storage
and recovery of energy requires complex electronic control and switching
equipment, with consequent energy loss.
- Very low internal resistance allows extremely rapid discharge when
shorted, resulting in a spark hazard similar to any other capacitor of
similar voltage and capacitance (generally much higher than
electrochemical cells).- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor#Vehicles
You didn't read far enough down the page.

In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:

I've been on a 120 mile round trip today I might end up doing that
again or more next week. I might not go anywhere the week after ...

Batteries can get 200-300 mile - RIGHT NOW. Then use light composite
materials for the body, as the Russians are right now.

Then there is the "range extender"

See below...


Right so what power can that store then compared to a conventional
battery and if so is it cost effective for a motor vehicle application
giving say a "useful" capacity and range?. I'd like a range of say 400
odd miles on a tankful or charge...

The average car driver DOES NOT need a range of 400 mile in 95% of use.
Hence why range extenders will be introduced. Many small cars will be just
EV.


If that so then what if I want to make a long trip to Scotland from
southern England or heaven forbid travel some distance around Europe how
will that pan out in practice without waiting hours for recharges?..

The secret is brake regen and supercapacitors/efficient batteries.
The new Russian hybrid using the rotary vane engines range extender
uses supercapacitors.

When one might ask will they be in the showrooms;?..

At a reasonable competitive price compared with conventional cars?..


Well if your going to add in another engine why bother with all the
electric traction?..

You really do not get it.

Look at the links I gave for the Russian Rotary Vane engine.


Well make up your mind if its an electric car or not?..

That engine if it does really exist and can be produced may well be more
efficient then the existing but its hardly an electric car is it?..
--
Tony Sayer

On 23/02/2012 07:02, harry wrote:
It's you that's an idiot.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor#Advantages

Interesting. Says that power density of commercial devices is nearly 1%
that of lithium ion cells.

Not quite ready yet!

Andy

On 23/02/2012 08:16, Doctor Drivel wrote:

The ultra battery:
http://www.csiro.au/science/Ultra-Battery

"CSIRO's UltraBattery invention is a hybrid energy storage device made
up of a supercapacitor integrated with a lead–acid battery cell."

Oh well.

Andy

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:29 am, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:29 am, Andy Burns
wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride
pollution free vehicles and still think that choking, smoking
diesels are OK

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black
smoke if you suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a
motorway on-ramp. Current car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've
*never* seen so much as a wisp of smoke from it ... though, yes
I've heard the horror stories of expensive replacements being
required ... will have to see about that if it comes to it.

The former is the EGR system. Expensive as well, but not as eye
watering as the DPF can be. Apparently there is a place in london
that will drill a sodding great hole through the DPF and remap
the engine as a "bodge".

My next car will not be a diesel.

Well said!

Oh christ, I've been praised twice by Drivel.

Look in a mirror and say his name 3 times.

--
Adam

Andy Champ wrote:
On 23/02/2012 08:16, Doctor Drivel wrote:

The ultra battery:
http://www.csiro.au/science/Ultra-Battery

"CSIRO's UltraBattery invention is a hybrid energy storage device made
up of a supercapacitor integrated with a lead€“acid battery cell."


Neatly combining the worst of all possible worlds...


Oh well.

Andy

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes
geoff wrote:
In message , ARWadsworth
writes
Steve Firth wrote:
"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700
miles and can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a half.
Which electric vehicle should I be looking at?

One with a 700 mile extension lead?

But not a 699 mile, 4095 feet, 11.4 inches long, though

(0.6" being ~1.5cm)

Well said Maxie! Well said!! No doubt an eloquent person as yourself
does not drive a Ford.


Actually, I do at the moment


--
geoff

"geoff" wrote in message
...
In message , Doctor Drivel
writes
geoff wrote:
In message , ARWadsworth
writes
Steve Firth wrote:
"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700
miles and can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a half.
Which electric vehicle should I be looking at?

One with a 700 mile extension lead?

But not a 699 mile, 4095 feet, 11.4 inches long, though

(0.6" being ~1.5cm)

Well said Maxie! Well said!! No doubt an eloquent person as yourself
does not drive a Ford.

Actually, I do at the moment

No No! You poor *******!!! Is the Credit Crunch affecting you that bad
Maxie? What a come down! You will have to play every night in that Paddy
band to make ends meet.

In message
, harry
writes
On Feb 22, 11:00*pm, geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes





On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor

Instant charging is possible.

Oh dear harry, you really don't know when to let people think you are an
idiot rather than prove it time and again


It's you that's an idiot.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

A bunch of students trying to get their heads around charging a
capacitor?

Did you miss this gem? "After a long while the capacitor charge has
built up to the point there will only be a trickle of current."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor#Advantages

I don't see the word "instant" in there anywhere wrt charging

At the end of the day, there is little difference between
supercapacitors and batteries, you are storing charge on plates

Faster charging, yes, instant charging? - go and learn some electronics




--
geoff

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes
harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:16 am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the
main one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone
does invent one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much
greater capacity and costs and weighs sod all, will always be their
great limitation.
There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much
potential to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.
There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor
Instant charging is possible.

The ultra battery:
http://www.csiro.au/science/Ultra-Battery

Does it wear a cape and mask?


--
geoff

On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:
In , Nthkentman
scribeth thus

wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Does that make the many councils and sub-contractors using EV knobheads as
well? Several major sub-contract companies I go to have EV for transport and
tasks up to 3.5 tonnes. Very useful they are too.

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for decades
to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs lower and
provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick people knobheads
too?

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?


No, it's just people like you that provide links and derogatory statements
about technology you know little about because it doesn't fit into your
"Good old days" attitude lifestyle that are..
Perhaps the apprentices assisting the companies building them should be
shouted at more often, or sacked for not clearing the snow in the car park
so you can park your gas guzzler and given a thick ear to remind them who's
the boss eh.....

Luddite
Do keep up at the back, there's a good chap


I know that sometimes Adam refers to a spade as a shovel and not an
earth inverting horticultural instrument but...

Electric vehicles in the main, not milk floats, around there they have a
Petrol powered one wonder why?.

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Electric motor power transmission is excellent but this power source.

To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...

Nobody seems to have spotted a major flaw with electric vehicles. If
you run out of charge you are buggered - you couldn't push it because of
the weight - with an ICE you could walk to the nearest garage with a can.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Nobody seems to have spotted a major flaw with electric vehicles. If
you run out of charge you are buggered - you couldn't push it because of
the weight - with an ICE you could walk to the nearest garage with a can.

In the days when milk floats were common, it was also common to see them
being towed home. And the likely reason was they had run out of power.

--
*According to my calculations, the problem doesn't exist.

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

On Feb 23, 5:49*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,





*harry wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:21*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_c...#Disadvantages
which says

- The amount of energy stored per unit weight is generally lower than
that of an electrochemical battery (3–5 W·h/kg for a standard
ultracapacitor, although 85 W.h/kg has been achieved in the lab[4] as of
2010 compared to 30–40 W·h/kg for a lead acid battery), 100-250 W·h/kg
for a lithium-ion battery and about 1/1,000th the volumetric energy
density of gasoline.

This alone rules out supercapacitors for any practical use as car batteries.

- Has the highest dielectric absorption of any type of capacitor.
- High self-discharge – the rate is considerably higher than that of an
electrochemical battery.
- Low maximum voltage – series connections are needed to obtain higher
voltages, and voltage balancing may be required.
- Unlike practical batteries, the voltage across any capacitor,
including EDLCs, drops significantly as it discharges. Effective storage
and recovery of energy requires complex electronic control and switching
equipment, with consequent energy loss.
- Very low internal resistance allows extremely rapid discharge when
shorted, resulting in a spark hazard similar to any other capacitor of
similar voltage and capacitance (generally much higher than
electrochemical cells).- Hide quoted text -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor#Vehicles
You didn't read far enough down the page.

So which precise bit of that says they have a practical application in
cars?

The very first paragraph.

On Feb 23, 10:44*pm, geoff wrote:
In message
, harry
writes





On Feb 22, 11:00*pm, geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes

On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor

Instant charging is possible.

Oh dear harry, you really don't know when to let people think you are an
idiot rather than prove it time and again

It's you that's an idiot.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

A bunch of students trying to get their heads around charging a
capacitor?

Did you miss this gem? "After a long while the capacitor charge has
built up to the point there will only be a trickle of current."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor#Advantages

I don't see the word "instant" in there anywhere wrt charging

At the end of the day, there is little difference between
supercapacitors and batteries, you are storing charge on plates

Faster charging, yes, instant charging? - go and learn some electronics

--
geoff- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Common knowledge. Capacitors have no resistance and hence can be
charged as fast as you like/power available.
In my other link.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

On Feb 24, 12:59*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
* *The Medway Handyman wrote:

Nobody seems to have spotted a major flaw with electric vehicles. *If
you run out of charge you are buggered - you couldn't push it because of
the weight - with an ICE you could walk to the nearest garage with a can.

Doctor Drivel wrote:
F Murtz wrote:
tony sayer wrote:

I'd like a
range of say 400 odd miles on a tankful or charge...

So would I on my petrol car.

Why? Are you going into a desert? There are filling stations everywhere.
Just being sarcastic in answer to some one wanting such mileage on an
electric vehicle that you do not usually get on normal vehicles.

In article
,
harry wrote:
In the days when milk floats were common, it was also common to see
them being towed home. And the likely reason was they had run out of
power.


Nonsense. They don't just stop as the charge runs out. They just go
slower and slower. As you might expect.

They never actually stop then? Are you dribble?

It is a bad thing to completely discharge any battery in any event.
There is a range remaining indicator in electric cars.

And? This somehow prevents it running out of power?

--
*A 'jiffy' is an actual unit of time for 1/100th of a second.

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

harry wrote:
Common knowledge. Capacitors have no resistance and hence can be
charged as fast as you like/power available.
In my other link.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-177843.html

*All* capacitors have an impedance value, which can be characterised as
an inductance and a resistance in series with the capcitance, as well as
a parasitic resistance which appears across the terminals. *All* real
current sources have an internal impedance, wich appears in series with
the source voltage. *No* capacitor can be instantaneously charged in the
real world, although you can come fairly close with small capacitors and
low supply impedance.

In theory, yes, in practice, not a hope in hell.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.