Is electric really the answer?

[Barrykearley]

With all due respect - Tesla said the model 3 was coming shortly for about 4 years.

The links you have posted are vague and tenuous at best. Absolutely no cast iron battery offer with commercial take up and proof of commercial use. It’s all marketing smoke and mirrors pishe.

 

[C8RKH]

Your full quote was:

"The facts are that BEV’s are just at the start of their ‘learning curve’ . Graphene and Solid State  batteries are supposed to be coming out shortly, the Evija is supposed to be capable of receiving 80% charge in 12 minutes - so no I don’t see they’re going to disappear by 2030."

Firstly, in the UK, battery electric vehicles have been in commercial use since the 1950's and I dispute fully that they are at the start of their learning curve. What they are in is the apex of the "hype curve" and the "trough of disillusionment" which is a phenomona described by Gartner where a technology gains early use support and is "hyped" to drive awareness and take up, only then to suffer issues as the reality of the technology does not live up to the hype - in EV's current case it is the durability and lifetime of the batteries and their cost. It's not unique to EV's and is well understood in technology circles. 

I said that "Graphene is years away from commercial use" in response to you and as I we were talking about BEV's I had assumed, not unreasonably, that the conversation was about Graphene in car batteries. Was that a ridiculous assumption for me to make?

Your response to my comment was very grown up "big fat Zero out of 10" and you used this link to justify you ridiculing my suggestion https://9to5google.com/2019/08/14/samsung-graphene-batteries-report/

I responded to that link, which refers to the POTENTIAL future use of Graphene in phones, not BEV's by saying "Oh and the heading says "Samsung HOPES" to use graphene as early as next year. Not now. And not at the size and scale you need for a car. As I said that is years away. HArdly zero out of ten".

You responded to that with: 

"For you information - using a Graphene Battery in a phone IS commercial use - you don't know what you say.

Implying, very implicitly, that Graphene is a commercial reality right now in phones, and then I challenged you to tell me which ones we could buy? Because if you cannot buy them, then they are not a commercial reality.

This is one aspect of the argument that evidences how you look to obfuscate or bend the argument.

I'm keeping this polite and factual as Bibs has asked but I think people can and will make their own minds up. Am I being pedantic, Hell yes. Are you being obtuse? Well, in my opinion, hell yes.

 

 

[KAS-118]

2 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

With all due respect - Tesla said the model 3 was coming shortly for about 4 years.

The links you have posted are vague and tenuous at best. Absolutely no cast iron battery offer with commercial take up and proof of commercial use. It’s all marketing smoke and mirrors pishe.

 

Well, at least I have posted links - and if you want to believe them or not then that's up to you.

 

[Barrykearley]

You’ve posted links which prove absolutely nothing. Nowt. Zilch. Academic articles can be linked no problem whatsoever which will predict battery developments. But none of that affects the here and no or the near term future.

theres no mainstream adoption of graphene batteries yet. None 

[KAS-118]

10 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

Your full quote was:

"The facts are that BEV’s are just at the start of their ‘learning curve’ . Graphene and Solid State  batteries are supposed to be coming out shortly, the Evija is supposed to be capable of receiving 80% charge in 12 minutes - so no I don’t see they’re going to disappear by 2030."

I said that "Graphene is years away from commercial use" in response to you and as I we were talking about BEV's I had assumed, not unreasonably, that the conversation was about Graphene in car batteries. Was that a ridiculous assumption for me to make?

Your response to my comment was very grown up "big fat Zero out of 10" and you used this link to justify you ridiculing my suggestion https://9to5google.com/2019/08/14/samsung-graphene-batteries-report/

I responded to that link, which refers to the POTENTIAL future use of Graphene in BEV's by saying "Oh and the heading says "Samsung HOPES" to use graphene as early as next year. Not now. And not at the size and scale you need for a car. As I said that is years away. HArdly zero out of ten".

You responded to that with: 

"For you information - using a Graphene Battery in a phone IS commercial use - you don't know what you say.

Implying, very implicitly, that Graphene is a commercial reality right now in phones, and then I challenged you to tell me which ones we could buy? Because if you cannot buy them, then they are not a commercial reality.

This is one aspect of the argument that evidences how you look to obfuscate or bend the argument.

I'm keeping this polite and factual as Bibs has asked but I think people can and will make their own minds up. Am I being pedantic, Hell yes. Are you being obtuse? Well, in my opinion, hell yes.

 

 

Hmmm...seem to have had this comment before - Graphene IS being used commercially you pedantic when you want to be - very sloppy when it suits you.

I never said Graphene was available in a Car battery now - as I've already reminded you - I said that Graphene and Solid State ale likely to be available shortly. 

So, as perviously stated it you who mislead and misquote.

Now, what was it you said about the ease of using hydrogen again?

 

4 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

You’ve posted links which prove absolutely nothing. Nowt. Zilch. Academic articles can be linked no problem whatsoever which will predict battery developments. But none of that affects the here and no or the near term future.

theres no mainstream adoption of graphene batteries yet. None 

Yeah, but you said you don't know what's happening - and you've given nothing to say - New Batteries aren't coming anytime soon. So you've given nothing at all....

Edited February 9, 2020 by KAS-118

[Barrykearley]

2 minutes ago, KAS-118 said:

Yeah, but you said you don't know what's happening - and you've given nothing to say - New Batteries aren't coming anytime soon. So you've given nothing at all....

Hang on - you’ve been the one stating this technology is ready to be commercially available.

make your mind up - your argument is disjointed and bouncing all over the place.

ive given nothing at all - mainly as I do have a connection directly to the sector and it’s simply not ready 

[KAS-118]

No, in respect of batteries I said that "The facts are that BEV’s are just at the start of their ‘learning curve’ . Graphene and Solid State  batteries are SUPPOSED to be coming out SHORTLY,"

Then CR8HK said that Graphene isn't commercially available. Now he's just confirmed how pedantic he is - so he must know exactly what he was saying. Graphene is commercially available and used in a wide range of products - that's a fact - and yes, that includes some chargers/power packs./

 

Whats' happening is that you and CR8HK are trying to say I presented an argument that I didn't actually present. Diappointing - but not entirely unexpected.

Still, the logic of your argument is that you don't believe newer batteries etc will be coming out.....

[Barrykearley]

I think what he’s said is graphene isn’t commercially used in batteries - and he’s spot on correct with that.

you really are starting to conflate issues

[C8RKH]

7 minutes ago, KAS-118 said:

Then CR8HK said that Graphene isn't commercially available

Wow - stop right there. I have NEVER said Graphene is not commercially available what I have stated is that Graphene batteries in EV' is not yet commercially available. By all means quote me but quote me correctly. The conversation is and has always been about BEV's and you seem intent on twisting it to anything else to suit your aims. I have always been referring to BEV's on the main points that you are raising.

When confronted with that fact it was YOU who twisted the argument with coming back with a link to what Samsung HOPES to do in the future with phones, not EV. Not very precise or on topic really.

 

[KAS-118]

2 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

I think what he’s said is graphene isn’t commercially used in batteries - and he’s spot on correct with that.

you really are starting to conflate issues

No, you ignoring what someone who admits to being pedantic actually said - which was "Graphene is years away from commercial use." Where does that say anything about batteries.

Are you saying he doesn't know ora mean what he actually says? 

I think you're avoiding what was said - by someone who seems to require precision.....

23 hours ago, C8RKH said:

 

Graphene is years away from commercial use.

This is what you actually said 

[C8RKH]

2 minutes ago, KAS-118 said:

 

23 hours ago, C8RKH said:

 

Graphene is years away from commercial use.

This is what you actually said 

Yes, with reference to EV's!  Which I am correct about and you even stated above. My god. This is hard work....

[KAS-118]

35 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

 By all means quote me but quote me correctly. 

 

I just have. Quote yourself - and quote yourself correctly in future

Edited February 9, 2020 by KAS-118

[Barrykearley]

This is getting bloody stupid. Over and out

[KAS-118]

5 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

Yes, with reference to EV's!  Which I am correct about and you even stated above. My god. This is hard work....

Oh come on - you're the pedantic one - I'm quoting exactly what you said.

You see you try and twist and turn things.

I said that Solid State and Graphene were supposed to be available "shortly' - which the indications (by experts) are that they are.

You replied saying that Graphene was not commercially available - so I respond saying it is - and give you examples of products that use it.

Now you frankly lie - and state that I was saying Graphene was available in car batteries now - I said nothing of the sort.

What is quite apparent, you demand precision when it suits you - but seek to than excuse your incorrect statement by claiming you were talking about something else.

Edited February 9, 2020 by KAS-118

[C8RKH]

Really Kevin? We were having a conversation about EVs and car batteries so when the application of Graphene is mentioned it is not unreasonable for the conversation to still be about EV's and car batteries.

You really are the most obtuse person I have ever come across. I really am done as there is just no reasoning with you. You are displaying all the traits of an internet troll and I request the moderators to now intervene please and review.

 

 

[KAS-118]

Really, someone says that something is going to be made available "soon" - then you start claiming they were saying it was 'available now'.

You say that a material isn't available  - when it clearly is. They demonstrate that to you. However, rather than just admit that was wrong you start claiming that you were saying that it not currently available in the very product that that other person said it wasn't available in.

That really takes the biscuit.

But yep - I see you're busy self projecting again. As i keep asking remind me about what you said about hydrogen again - Mr 24 years of 'expertise'

[PAR]

1 hour ago, KAS-118 said:

Mr 24 years of 'expertise'

Sorry but this one is a misquote. He said he worked in the sector for 24 years, not that any expertise were required for the work! 🤣😂

[KAS-118]

I stand corrected 😜

[Mysterae]

For those of you that still have some popcorn left after reading the last few pages:

 

[KAS-118]

Yes, clearly you'd hope that Battery Technology gets improved.

However, the weight/and bulk disadvantage of the 'fuel' (i.e. the batteries themselves) is reduced by the fact that electric motors are considerably smaller than a Petrol engine, that you don't need a gearbox and prop-shaft, nor do you need all the engine cooling.

In his  'balancing'  - he poses some interesting questions - not least - if electric vehicles has been the mainstream originally - would we even think about moving to petrol?

That video is here 

 

[red vtec]

Having watched Harry's Garage with an I-pace. its clear that electric wont work until the infrastructure is sorted. Worth watching

 

[Neal H]

It’s very easy for a government to announce that something is going to happen in 15 or 20 years time. They know that there will be multiple changes of government in that period, so multiple chances of it being delayed or changed. Governments don’t plan beyond the current parliament.

it’s clear that the required infrastructure won’t be in place in 15 years, if for no other reason that no one will be willing to invest the hundreds of billions needed to make it happen, particularly when there are far more immediately pressing demands on the public purse. You can’t expect ‘industry’ to stump up the investment because they know that governments will move the goal posts so it will be wasted, particularly given the serious question marks over whether batteries are REALLY the long term solution.

[MPx]

7 hours ago, Mysterae said:

For those of you that still have some popcorn left after reading the last few pages:

 

Interesting stuff well argued, but some flaws in my view.  On the science/density argument I'm sure he's done the maths, but the reality isn't as he implies so there is something else going on that he fails to address - maybe the efficiency of electric versus ICE motors? - I dont know.  Clearly electric cars actually go much further, much faster than ICE cars on 33kWHrs of energy.  No mainstream ICE will do much on 1 gallon of petrol, ALL electric cars will do more on 33kWHrs.  In terms of Volume, the Evija shows what can be achieved by not having all the stuff associated with ICE - the Evija is not 20 times the size of other hypercars.

 

Also on the charging infrastructure/convenience points - absolutely agree with him and Harry...but again not necessarily an issue for a significant market share.  As I said above I've never yet needed to use the half baked public charging infrastructure.   Its simply not relevant.  And plugging in overnight at home every few days is way simpler and more convenient than stopping at a petrol station.   Its a bit like saying no-one will buy an Exige until its got 4 seats.  Obviously its no good for someone that needs four seats but there's plenty out there that don't.   And those that need 4 seats or load space only sometimes (rarely?) have the option to hire a 4 seater or van and we don't deride their choice because it doesn't do everything they might ever need.  

[KAS-118]

20 minutes ago, MPx said:

Also on the charging infrastructure/convenience points - absolutely agree with him and Harry...but again not necessarily an issue for a significant market share.  As I said above I've never yet needed to use the half baked public charging infrastructure.   Its simply not relevant.  And plugging in overnight at home every few days is way simpler and more convenient than stopping at a petrol station.   Its a bit like saying no-one will buy an Exige until its got 4 seats.  Obviously its no good for someone that needs four seats but there's plenty out there that don't.   And those that need 4 seats or load space only sometimes (rarely?) have the option to hire a 4 seater or van and we don't deride their choice because it doesn't do everything they might ever need.  

Yeah, I used to be concerned about the range issue.  But most decent Electric cars will give you 250 miles and I very rarely have to go on trips longer than that. As you say the advantage is that if you don't need to go longer than 250 miles in one go then you can avoid having the inconvenience of going to Petrol/Filling Stations full stop.

Furthermore, when I last did do a longish drive in the UK, we stopped at a service station to eat and a lot of the parking bays had Electric Charging Points in any event - so had I been in an EV I would have just charged up then.

Usually when I do such a drive its to go on holiday, so frankly on the very rare occasions that it would be an issue I'd probably just hire a car in any event.

Clearly BEV's aren't going to suit everyone at the moment - but to me at least 'filling up at home' is a rather attractive proposition. 

[Mysterae]

Charging at home is all well and fine but not everyone can. Also, travelling outside your car's range will inevitably involve stopping off, and the more electric cars that are on the road with no investment in the charging infrastructure scenes like this could be a common occurrence:

 

Extreme examples I grant you, but imagine being that 50th Tesla in the last video! Say a Tesla leaves the charging station every 2 minutes, you'll get there in 100 minutes sat in your car, then your add your 40 minute charging cycle. Over 2 hours added to your journey. Progress is about going forward, not backwards!

I'll state I'm not against electric cars and I'm even considering one to replace my dirty diesel (with a real world range of 575 miles). I'd really, really like a Tesla Cybertruck :). The real world range and immature infrastructure concerns are enough to dissuade me at the moment. Plus I can't afford a Cybertruck!