On 02/12/2020 13:59:26, Andrew wrote:
On 02/12/2020 13:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/12/2020 13:29, Tim+ wrote:
Andrew wrote:

All fast chargers shorten the life of batteries. The 1 hour fast
charger
I had for AA camera batteries had a little fan in the base to keep them
cool while charging. EV car batteries are encased by the vehicle and
cannot easily dissipate the heat. Where does it go ?.

Out of the battery cooling system.

Do you really think that manufacturers havent thought about this?

Yes, he probably does think that.

The ignorance of the general public about how hardware design is done
is almost absolute.


Explain how the USA Ford F150 pickup truck had its fuel tank
mounted just under the doors so that a T-bone impact created a
fireball ?. How hard did the manufacturers think about that ?.

EV batteries are generally guaranteed, therefore it is in the
manufacturer's interests to mollycoddle them.

Why you should ever think this is comparable to the placement of a fuel
tank beats me.

On 02/12/2020 13:45, charles wrote:
It is quite correct that I have never driven one. However, I was all set to
buy one in October and went to a dealer to see one. It was when the dealer
told me that the advertised mileage - 245 miles range - was in the real
world only 185 (25% reduction) that I started looking seriously at the
drawbacks. I had thought that I could ignore these range restrictions and
hire an IC car for the long journeys - then I discovered that hiring a car
if you are 80 is problematic and expensive. I'm going to have to wait for
range improvements before I buy. I'm not against them, but ATM there isn't
one that suits my needs. For the last 50 years, my main specification in a
car is that I can drive from Surrey to Edinburgh in a day without effort.

In my case, it is simply that the cost of owning two cars - I am nowhere
near a car hire place, and as you say as you get older hiring gets
gritty - precludes it, and you can get very cheap diesel cars after all
the hoo hah.



--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

On 02/12/2020 13:37, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/12/2020 12:29, Andy Burns wrote:
Andrew wrote:

EV car batteries are encased by the vehicle and
cannot easily dissipate the heat. Where does it go ?.

The better EVs have liquid cooling for the batteries.
They all have ban blown cooling


Youll have to explain that one. Mine are liquid cooled.

Tim

And no fan to blow on a radiator?

'liquid cooled' unless you have a constant supply of cold water means
air cooled in reality. The liquid is just a way to get the heat to the
fan blown radiator.

However am surprised. there is no great need to keep batteries at an
exact temperature. Somewhere between 10 and 40 C is good enough

Blowing air on fins is enough to do that




--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

wrote:

alan_m wrote:

A the ranges for EV is when the batteries are new and haven't been
abused with fast charging!

The car controls the charge rate so, unless the designers coc&ed-up,
it's impossible to mistreat the batteries

For AC charging the car's on-board charger is in control, limited by how
many amps the EVSE will provide.

But for fast DC charging, AIUI the external charger is connected (maybe
via a contactor?) to the car's battery, there is communication where
presumably the car lets the charger know what voltage represents full
and what's the max current it can handle?

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
wrote:

alan_m wrote:

A the ranges for EV is when the batteries are new and haven't been
abused with fast charging!

The car controls the charge rate so, unless the designers coc&ed-up,
it's impossible to mistreat the batteries

For AC charging the car's on-board charger is in control, limited by how
many amps the EVSE will provide.

But for fast DC charging, AIUI the external charger is connected (maybe
via a contactor?) to the car's battery, there is communication where
presumably the car lets the charger know what voltage represents full
and what's the max current it can handle?

You're hardly going to use jump leads, so assume the connector on the car
for fast charging (and the charger that fits it) takes all this into
account?

--
*Many hamsters only blink one eye at a time *

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

Andrew wrote:
On 02/12/2020 12:43, bert wrote:
In article , alan_m
writes
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

That was the dip switch on one of my early cars Riley 1.5

Ditto vauxhall victors FA and FB. Maybe that was the accepted
way of doing it, since it required switching a fairly high
current, something that the available technology made it
difficult with column switches in those days.

All cars I ever drove of that sort of vintage ('50s, '60s) had foot
operated dip switches, standard cause of grinding gears was trying to
change gear using the dip switch instead of the clutch pedal.

--
Chris Green
·

"Andrew" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:06, tim... wrote:


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On 29 Nov 2020 10:23:45 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Last three cars have had heated seats. Don't like them, even the
current car with two heat seatings. The lowest still makes your
arse
and back hot and sweaty and don't do anything for feet, knees or
hands.
What do you have to do, wear long johns and gloves?

I love mine, simply because my back can be very stiff first thing in
the
morning. The heated seat does wonders; I start off on the top setting
(3) and move down to 2, 1 and then off.

Fairly Nuff. No doubt with the cabin heater running as well. Try
driving for an hour when it's cold without the cabin heater. I
actually quite like to feel my feet and fingers.

Cabin heater - I'm sure many on here can remember when that was an
optional extra.

nope

not even close


--
bert


£10? optional extra on the 105E Ford Anglia circa 1959?

so you need to be 80 to remember one then

tim

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
There is a world of difference between parking meters, needing zero
infrastructure, or running fibre down the street and that of providing
lots of 100+ amp supplies at the side of roads every few yards - like
generation, distribution, sub-stations, plus major and expensive
improvements in the distribution network.

We already have a high amp supply to nearly every house. Largely
unused at night. Nor will the average car user need to charge the
battery from empty to full every night.

Not sure of the current figures but average car mileage used to be
given as about 10,000 miles a year. That is less than one full charge
a week.

but how are you going to get a street full of cars to share out the
chargers fairly if they have to share on a 1 day in 7 basis?

You have enough chargers. One per bay if needed. It's hardly rocket
science.

Oh I know

because that was where the thread started and the comment based upon "you
only need to charge your car up once a week" was the solution to not making
the street scene look messy by having one charger per space



And that charger is going to cost a great deal less than the car.

As has been explained, it's not the cost of the charged but the work to
install it



Think of it like the early days of cars. Where you got your petrol from a
chemist. Supply will always keep up with demand, but usually with a lag.
It's called business. ;-)

unlike petrol supply, communal chargers need to be provided in excess of
demand, because they can be "over occupied" by people not actually using
them

In article ,
tim... wrote:
And that charger is going to cost a great deal less than the car.

As has been explained, it's not the cost of the charged but the work to
install it

I doubt it would actually be that much when geared up to do it. Think when
they changed every gas appliance for natural gas. Or Virgin etc running in
cables for your TV, etc.

Lot more expensive for a one off.

--
*I don't work here. I'm a consultant

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

Dave Plowman wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

But for fast DC charging, AIUI the external charger is connected (maybe
via a contactor?) to the car's battery

You're hardly going to use jump leads, so assume the connector on the car
for fast charging (and the charger that fits it) takes all this into
account?

Yes, it's not 12VDC, between the car and the external charger, they
negotiate over a data connection to supply up to 1000V and up to 500A,
though for the full whack it needs silver plated contacts and liquid
cooled cable, harry's granny cable can't compete.

On 02/12/2020 15:55, Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Lithium air, which uses raw lithium and oxygen, could be theoretically
good enough

But no one has made it work yet outside a lab.



And it's no good saying "We can develop or discover them", no we can't. Either
possible chemistries are known about today, or they do not exist.

Remember that when the Wright brothers did their thing in 1904, the only think
that stood between them and the 747 was engineering development.

Yup. Once we have hydrocarbon fuel energy densities, flight was just a
matter of engines and structures



--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

In message , bert writes
In article , alan_m
writes
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

That was the dip switch on one of my early cars Riley 1.5

And the Morgan series 2.

--
Tim Lamb

In message
,
Tim+ writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
alan_m wrote:
.



Whist painting today I had the radio on in the background and there was
a article on electric vehicles. One contributor seemed to believe that
the utopian era of zero road fund tax, zero congestion charges and cheap
refuelling energy would go on forever hence the purchase and running
cost of a EV would always be cheaper that running petrol/diesel.

Quite. Like lots of their advocates they live in the present while
claiming to speak for the future.

Is that worse than many of the respondents here who live in the past and
claim to speak for the future? Its obvious that the majority of anti-EV
comments are coming from folk who have never owned nor driven one.

I'm not anti. Especially for the boss to use as a shopping trolley. The
manufacturers seems to have added the Government discount to the asking
price:-(

--
Tim Lamb

In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , bert writes
In article , alan_m
writes
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

That was the dip switch on one of my early cars Riley 1.5

And the Morgan series 2.

Reckon most UK cars had a floor dip switch at that time. They didn't have
stalks side of the wheel until much later.

--
*Organized Crime Is Alive And Well; It's Called Auto Insurance. *

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

On 02/12/2020 10:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


I'd hope car batteries and chargers have electronics to make sure the
batteries can't be abused too.

Charging automatically slows at 80%.

--
Frank

On 02/12/2020 13:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
Tim+ wrote:
All fast chargers shorten the life of batteries. The 1 hour fast
charger I had for AA camera batteries had a little fan in the base to
keep them cool while charging. EV car batteries are encased by the
vehicle and cannot easily dissipate the heat. Where does it go ?.

The cooling fan on my charger is for the charger electronics. It is not
vented to the batteries.

Out of the battery cooling system.

Do you really think that manufacturers haven‘t thought about this?

Quite. Many offer a decent warranty on the battery pack. They're hardly
going to do that if it is easily abused?

VW do eight years on capacity not dropping below 70%.

--
Frank

On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/12/2020 21:20, charles wrote:
In article , bert wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On 29 Nov 2020 10:23:45 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Last three cars have had heated seats. Don't like them, even the
current car with two heat seatings. The lowest still makes your
arse
and back hot and sweaty and don't do anything for feet, knees or
hands.
What do you have to do, wear long johns and gloves?

I love mine, simply because my back can be very stiff first thing in
the morning. The heated seat does wonders; I start off on the top
setting (3) and move down to 2, 1 and then off.

Fairly Nuff. No doubt with the cabin heater running as well. Try
driving
for an hour when it's cold without the cabin heater. I actually quite
like to feel my feet and fingers.

Cabin heater - I'm sure many on here can remember when that was an
optional extra.

and so was a windscreen wiper on the passenger's side.

And a windscreen washer..

Fill a Fairy Liquid bottle with a suitable mixture, stick your hand out
of the window and direct it onto the windscreen.

--
Max Demian

On 02/12/2020 12:44, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Â* NY wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

I presume it didn't help that few people used any antifreeze/cleaning
additive in the windscreen washer water in the days of manual rubber
bulbs/pumps.

My first car had a vacuum screen washer. With a glass reservoir. That did
not like cold weather. ;-)

Remember the Ford 100Es with vacuum operated wipers.

Infinitesimally adjustable speed, but they stopped when you put your
foot down when going up a hill.

--
Max Demian

On 02/12/2020 19:12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , bert writes
In article , alan_m
writes
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

That was the dip switch on one of my early cars Riley 1.5

And the Morgan series 2.

Reckon most UK cars had a floor dip switch at that time. They didn't have
stalks side of the wheel until much later.

On my father's 1939 Austin Cambridge the dip switch extinguished the
offside light and dipped the nearside with a solenoid moving the reflector.

--
Max Demian

In article , Andrew
writes
On 02/12/2020 13:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/12/2020 13:29, Tim+ wrote:
Andrew wrote:

All fast chargers shorten the life of batteries. The 1 hour fast
charger
I had for AA camera batteries had a little fan in the base to keep them
cool while charging. EV car batteries are encased by the vehicle and
cannot easily dissipate the heat. Where does it go ?.

Out of the battery cooling system.

Do you really think that manufacturers havent thought about this?

Yes, he probably does think that.
The ignorance of the general public about how hardware design is
done is almost absolute.


Explain how the USA Ford F150 pickup truck had its fuel tank
mounted just under the doors so that a T-bone impact created a
fireball ?. How hard did the manufacturers think about that ?.


Tim



The Pinto was the classic. Several incidents. There was a notorious cost
benefit analysis produce internally by Ford calculating which would
cost least, fixing the design or carrying on paying compensation to
victims families.
--
bert

In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
On 02/12/2020 12:44, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
NY wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

I presume it didn't help that few people used any antifreeze/cleaning
additive in the windscreen washer water in the days of manual rubber
bulbs/pumps.

My first car had a vacuum screen washer. With a glass reservoir. That did
not like cold weather. ;-)

Remember the Ford 100Es with vacuum operated wipers.

Infinitesimally adjustable speed, but they stopped when you put your
foot down when going up a hill.

Vauxhall - or rather some of them - had mechanical wipers driven direct
from the engine. Rather like a cable rev-counter.

-

--
*Elephants are the only mammals that can't jump *

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

Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/09/22...-battery-cell/


Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 02/12/2020 23:30, Max Demian wrote:
On 02/12/2020 12:44, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Â* NY wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

I presume it didn't help that few people used any antifreeze/cleaning
additive in the windscreen washer water in the days of manual rubber
bulbs/pumps.

My first car had a vacuum screen washer. With a glass reservoir. That
did
not like cold weather. ;-)

Remember the Ford 100Es with vacuum operated wipers.

Infinitesimally adjustable speed, but they stopped when you put your
foot down when going up a hill.

or passing a lorry generating a ton of spray


--
€œBut what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!€�

Mary Wollstonecraft

On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/09/22...-battery-cell/


Tim



--
€œBut what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!€�

Mary Wollstonecraft

On 01/12/2020 21:20, charles wrote:
In article , bert wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On 29 Nov 2020 10:23:45 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Last three cars have had heated seats. Don't like them, even the
current car with two heat seatings. The lowest still makes your
arse
and back hot and sweaty and don't do anything for feet, knees or
hands.
What do you have to do, wear long johns and gloves?

I love mine, simply because my back can be very stiff first thing in
the morning. The heated seat does wonders; I start off on the top
setting (3) and move down to 2, 1 and then off.

Fairly Nuff. No doubt with the cabin heater running as well. Try driving
for an hour when it's cold without the cabin heater. I actually quite
like to feel my feet and fingers.

Cabin heater - I'm sure many on here can remember when that was an
optional extra.

and so was a windscreen wiper on the passenger's side.


And so were screen washers. I remember buying a Paddy Hopkirk
screenwasher kit for my first mini which involved drilling holes in the
bonnet. Manually operated internally with a pushbutton operated pumper.

On 02/12/2020 23:30, Max Demian wrote:
On 02/12/2020 12:44, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Â* NY wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And a windscreen washer..

On my first car teh windscreen washer was operated by pressing, with
my foot, a rubber bulb situated next to the clutch pedal. I could
guarantee that on every winter's morning the water in the bulb would
be frozen solid.

I presume it didn't help that few people used any antifreeze/cleaning
additive in the windscreen washer water in the days of manual rubber
bulbs/pumps.

My first car had a vacuum screen washer. With a glass reservoir. That
did
not like cold weather. ;-)

Remember the Ford 100Es with vacuum operated wipers.

Infinitesimally adjustable speed, but they stopped when you put your
foot down when going up a hill.

And as soon as you crested the brow, they waggled so furiously,
the blade would sometimes get ejected :-)

On 02/12/2020 15:58, tim... wrote:


"Andrew" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2020 07:06, tim... wrote:


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On 29 Nov 2020 10:23:45 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Last three cars have had heated seats. Don't like them, even the
current car with two heat seatings. The lowest still makes your
arse
and back hot and sweaty and don't do anything for feet, knees or
hands.
What do you have to do, wear long johns and gloves?

I love mine, simply because my back can be very stiff first thing
in the
morning. The heated seat does wonders; I start off on the top setting
(3) and move down to 2, 1 and then off.

Fairly Nuff. No doubt with the cabin heater running as well. Try
driving for an hour when it's cold without the cabin heater. I
actually quite like to feel my feet and fingers.

Cabin heater - I'm sure many on here can remember when that was an
optional extra.

nope

not even close


--
bert


£10? optional extra on the 105E Ford Anglia circa 1959?

so you need to be 80 to remember one then

tim



No, my best mate in school was the son of the local
Ford dealer. Lots++ of interesting old cars left in the
huge yard and field behind the workshop. We would get them
going and drive them around the field (age much less than 17).
Also a constant procession of new vehicles arriving and being
PDI'd in the workshop before moving to the showroom.

On 02/12/2020 14:45, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/12/2020 13:45, charles wrote:
It is quite correct that I have never driven one. However, I was all
set to
buy one in October and went to a dealer to see one. It was when the
dealer
told me that the advertised mileage - 245 miles range - was in the real
world only 185 (25% reduction) that I started looking seriously at the
drawbacks. I had thought that I could ignore these range restrictions and
hire an IC car for the long journeys - then I discovered that hiring a
car
if you are 80 is problematic and expensive. I'm going to have to wait for
range improvements before I buy. I'm not against them, but ATM there
isn't
one that suits my needs. For the last 50 years, my main specification
in a
car is that I can drive from Surrey to Edinburgh in a day without effort.

In my case, it is simply that the cost of owning two cars - I am nowhere
near a car hire place, and as you say as you get older hiring gets
gritty - precludes it, and you can get very cheap diesel cars after all
the hoo hah.



How cheap will the annual road tax be though ?.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 03/12/2020 16:34, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

In the limit, yes.


--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 16:34, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

In the limit, yes.


But were not at the limit yet are we? So clearly at the moment design IS
important. So Im absolutely correct to say that its not ALL about the
chemistry.

Out of interest, what do you take for your blood pressure? Seems to me you
spend a lot of your life being very angry.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 3 Dec 2020 at 16:34:40 GMT, "Tim+" wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

That would be a bit second order - unless the first cells were designed really
stupidly.

--
Roger Hayter

On 03/12/2020 17:18, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 16:34, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

In the limit, yes.


But were not at the limit yet are we?

Yes. We are. See my experience.


So clearly at the moment design IS
important.

Not for energy density.


So Im absolutely correct to say that its not ALL about the
chemistry.


No, you are wrong


Out of interest, what do you take for your blood pressure? Seems to me you
spend a lot of your life being very angry.

No, I dont.



--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2020 at 16:34:40 GMT, "Tim+" wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

That would be a bit second order - unless the first cells were designed really
stupidly.


So you would say that there been no progress in lithium cell capacity in
the last 5 years? That EV range hasnt improved dramatically over this
time?

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 03/12/2020 18:30, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2020 at 16:34:40 GMT, "Tim+" wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

That would be a bit second order - unless the first cells were designed really
stupidly.

Precisely,. It does impact on charge and discharge rates and there have
been significant advances in these over the last 16 years, but not
energy density.
Lithium polymer is a bit safer and pit higher power and a bit more
robust bit not one iota higher in energy density.,

It's as mature as an alkaline cell.

Lithium air promises better, but no one has made a commercially viable
safe unit yet.




--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 03/12/2020 18:36:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 17:18, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 16:34, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit
being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we
are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to
increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

In the limit, yes.


But were not at the limit yet are we?

Yes. We are.Â* See my experience.

No we are not at the limit. Technology is always improving even if
chemistry isn't.

So clearly at the moment design IS
important.

Not for energy density.

If you're denial of the above then you will not comprehend that energy
density is a function of chemistry and yechnology.

Â* So Im absolutely correct to say that its not ALL about the
chemistry.


No, you are wrong

Do make up your mind.

Out of interest, what do you take for your blood pressure?Â* Seems to
me you
spend a lot of your life being very angry.

No, I dont.

Perhaps you should consider anger management?

On 03/12/2020 18:37, Tim+ wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2020 at 16:34:40 GMT, "Tim+" wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/12/2020 11:25, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Dec 2020 at 14:28:16 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

wrote:

That shows to me that there is a fundamental theoretical limit being
approached here. The chemistry we are using can't do any better.

Are there any other chemistries that have potential? If not, we are ****ed.

Its not all about the chemistry, the designs are being improve to increase
energy density and reduce charging time.

Energy density is ABSOLUTELY a function of the chemistry.

Chemistry AND cell design.

Do you think the surface area of the electrodes is irrelevant to energy
density of a battery?

Tim

That would be a bit second order - unless the first cells were designed really
stupidly.


So you would say that there been no progress in lithium cell capacity in
the last 5 years?

Yes

That EV range hasnt improved dramatically over this
time?

No. but that is not down to better batteries. Just bigger ones. And
better management and aero and regeneration.



Tim



--
Of what good are dead warriors? €¦ Warriors are those who desire battle
more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory €¦ The good of dead warriors, Mother, is
that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.

On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:44:39 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

We already have a high amp supply to nearly every house. Largely unused
at night. Nor will the average car user need to charge the battery from
empty to full every night.

Yes but it's engineered to depend heavyly on diversity. It doesn't
take many "extra" 2 kW loads to overload the local distribution.
Mains gas doesn't fail very often but when it does and the gas board
give out loads of fan heaters it's not unknown for the local
electricty substation to catch fire or trip out a few hours later...

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:44:39 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

We already have a high amp supply to nearly every house. Largely unused
at night. Nor will the average car user need to charge the battery from
empty to full every night.

Yes but it's engineered to depend heavyly on diversity. It doesn't
take many "extra" 2 kW loads to overload the local distribution.
Mains gas doesn't fail very often but when it does and the gas board
give out loads of fan heaters it's not unknown for the local
electricty substation to catch fire or trip out a few hours later...

Yehbut again, that would be in waking hours.

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

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