2 ms·
Poking around a little it looks like the real measures are gallons per acre. Which makes sense, a gigantic machine moving fast will clear a ton of acreage, and
by jfoutz 10y ago
Poking around a little it looks like the real measures are gallons per acre. Which makes sense, a gigantic machine moving fast will clear a ton of acreage, and suck down fuel like it's going out of style. So i picked a bad measure.
As i said, i mostly agree, it's just not there today.
That said, battery capacity historically improves 5-8% a year. Cars aren't worth it, but they're very close. I'd take the yes side of a $10 bet about John Deere selling an electric tractor in 15 years or less.
- emp_zealoth 10y agoSure, maybe a tiny utility one. Actual workhorse? Those can have 200L or 400L or even bigger tanks - when you go out in the field you are going to stay there until the work is done (or the day is done). So account for 10 or 12 or more hours of work. So let's take the best case scenario - 200L tank on a machine that takes ~10 gallons (say 50L) 40% efficiency for the diesel engine cuts energy available from the tank giving us 3040kWh for 4 hours of work of not-the-biggest machine That is ~225 powerWALLS (at 5,500$ a pop it gives us 1,237,500$), The weight is 27000 kg That is 16 powerPACKS 2 (wiki doesn't say if those are available really) - at 145,100$ a pop it comes out to 2,321,600 - but it might be wiki numbers, it also says 445$/kWh - it comes out to 1,352,800$ - more reasonable compared to powerwalls, the weight is ~26000kg That is for a small-ish (relatively) machine with 200L tank, for 4h of work... Now take a 20 gallon/h that works for 10 hours. And finally, we come to the issue of lifespan. In work machines you are going to be using close to nominal power for the whole time it's working - batteries don't like that, they get hot, the cells might die and worst of all it really damages even the working ones Then there is an issue of ground pressure - you don't want your machine sinking into the ground and fucking it up