5 ms·

i honestly think gasoline is a far batter energy storage platform for longer distance, personal journeys. * far higher energy density, ~45MJ/kg compared to LiP

i honestly think gasoline is a far batter energy storage platform for longer distance, personal journeys. * far higher energy density, ~45MJ/kg compared to LiPo's ~1MJ/kg. (in fact the latter is probably the only reason LiPo is safe at all - more on that) * essentially immediate "recharge" time * 100+ years of ICE drivetrain expertise * LiPo is a "two-part"-like fuel - it has everything it needs to release the energy stored inside of it (as opposed to gasoline that requires an external supply of oxygen). improvements to energy density necessarily make it less safe: LiPo battery fires are very difficult to extinguish, and release most of their energy in a short period of time. to be clear, EVs have a place, for example, congested and population dense areas, where the primary concern is air quality, rather than global CO2 emissions. i really think consumerism/capatilism coupled with society's less than healthy relationship with science & futurism have made EVs seem a lot more attractive than they really are. i'm not so sure i'm comfortable with the conditions of the mines where the rare-earth metals required for all these battery packs comes from. IMO, technologies that capture carbon from the air and produce gasoline are far more attractive. the energy for which should naturally come from the sun, even if this process is "inefficient" - we receive the energy regardless of whether we use it or not. more broadly speaking, right-to-repair/user serviceability has been degraded for most consumer platforms. even modern gasoline cars face the same problems as EVs. work (likely legislation) needs to be done on every front to improve this, in all facets of technology.

audunw 4y ago
You seem to be under the common misconception that it's the energy density of batteries that make them unsafe. This is completely false. There's nothing inherent about battery energy density that makes them more dangerous. What makes LiPo/Li-ion unsafe is that they have a flammable liquid electrolyte in the middle, that's both responsible for starting the fire (the explosion you see with some battery fires) and for failing to keep the anode/cathode separated afterwards. LiFePo doesn't have significantly less energy density, but they're far safer. Same with sodium batteries. Solid state lithium ion batteries have more energy density than Li-Ion/LiPo in some cases, but are generally far more safe, since there's no flammable electrolyte. EVs, even with LiPo/Li-ion, are FAR safer than ICE vehicles, there's just no competition. Lots of oil and gasoline being piped around, with potential for leaks + old electrical wiring = recipe for disaster. We had a huge parking garage fire here in Norway recently, started - as they often do - by an ICE vehicle. Lots of EVs in the garage, but not a SINGLE EV battery pack caught fire. If all of them were EVs, the fire would be far less serious (the interior of the cars still burned, but that's all). EV battery fires are tricky to extinguish, I'll give you that. But the fire department here in Norway say they already have the needed training/experience, and make it clear that EVs are far better for fire safety in general. As for your points on whether they're better for longer distance, personal journeys.. I mean, yeah.. at some point they are. If you're driving 1000km in a day I'd definitely agree. But how many people do that often? * far higher energy density: don't forget to account for efficiency and regenerative breaking (hybrids get some of that benefit, but then you get all the downsides of both technologies) .. practical range difference is much closer than what your numbers would indicate. For most people the range of EVs is good enough, even for long trips. * essentially immediate "recharge" time: Yeah, but it's still a couple of minutes and you have to stand there while it's filling. Almost every single road-trip charging session for me has been: 1. spend 30 seconds plugging in and beeping the payment card (with Tesla you don't even have to do this). 2. walk into a restaurant/cafe/grocery store and take a pee, drink some coffee, buy groceries for the trip, etc.. 3. come back to a fully charged car * 100+ years of ICE drivetrain expertise: This is totally pointless. The only reason you need that expertise with ICE drivetrain is because it's so hard to maintain. Most EVs simply don't have anything to maintain, other than what all cars have (break pads, air filters, etc.). And I've never heard anyone here in Norway having trouble getting their EV fixed due to inexperience. The training isn't hard. You can even get people to change individual battery cells on some cars now. * The last point I covered above.
- foxhill 4y ago
  > You seem to be under the common misconception that it's the energy density of batteries that make them unsafe. not at all. in fact, i said their (comparatively) low energy density is what makes them safe. that low energy density is a problem for range, places a lower bound on the size of vehicle, and somehow fixing that issue will make battery storage a far less safe option. > There's nothing inherent about battery energy density that makes them more dangerous. yes, their absolutely is - gasoline requires air to burn. batteries store energy, and they can discharge that energy without any other materials: a battery could burn in space. > What makes LiPo/Li-ion unsafe is that they have a flammable liquid electrolyte in the middle. well its the combination of the electrolyte and the metals that make the battery the battery, it wouldn't be battery without it. > EVs, even with LiPo/Li-ion, are FAR safer than ICE vehicles, there's just no competition. indeed, and i don't disagree. i think you may have misunderstood what i was trying to say about about safety here: i'm not trying to suggest that gasoline vehicles are inherently safer, at all. i'm saying that if you were to create a battery technology that was even 10x more energy dense, i.e. 10MJ/kg, you'd have great difficulty in making that vehicle safe. > But the fire department here in Norway say they already have the needed training/experience, and make it clear that EVs are far better for fire safety in general. once the battery has started burning, it has basically inextinguishable. "clear the area" is the only option you'd have. > As for your points on whether they're better for longer distance, personal journeys.. I mean, yeah.. at some point they are. If you're driving 1000km in a day I'd definitely agree. But how many people do that often? in Europe? probably not much. in the US? India? Pakistan? > [...] For most people the range of EVs is good enough, even for long trips. likely true, and, as i mentioned, EVs have a place. > Almost every single road-trip charging session for me has been: 1. spend 30 seconds plugging in and beeping the payment card (with Tesla you don't even have to do this). 2. walk into a restaurant/cafe/grocery store and take a pee, drink some coffee, buy groceries for the trip, etc.. 3. come back to a fully charged car well there's a couple of issues there - adding 30/45 minutes to a journey like that might not be suitable for everyone. traumatic charge rates (above 4C) are not good for the battery, too. > The only reason you need that expertise with ICE drivetrain is because it's so hard to maintain. well even the linked video states that this isn't really the case these days for ICE vehicles, a point i largely agree with. regardless, if gasoline could be recovered from the atmosphere - closing the CO2 cycle - what would be so bad about this? as it stands, with EVs alone, we're pushing the costs of a complete infrastructure change over to individuals. sure, government assistance might help us here in the west, but that's not the world a lot of people live in.
lnsru 4y ago
How often are you driving more than 300 miles a day? For me it’s 4-6 times a year. Otherwise I take a plane. I can live with one 20 minute charging stop for each journey. The electric vehicle model variety today is amazing. From luxury Lucid Air and EQS to Dacia Spring and even EQV van. And it’s growing! Everything is there. Charging at home is also game changer. It’s cheap and convenient. I don’t really want go back to petrol car.
- foxhill 4y ago
  i'd say about the same - less than 10 times a year. this isn't just about us as individuals; we still have buses, taxi's, rental cars, service cars, trucks, car-sharing, planes, etc. few of these can viably use batteries (and when they can there's usually an additional consequence). not with out either a significant increase in energy density - which has its own risks - or another massive investment in things like rapid battery exchange. great, your vehicle works for you. as i said, EVs have a significant role to play in our society. i don't want you to throw away your EV or have it taken from you. all i'm saying is that i believe gasoline to be a better energy storage mechanism for a significant proportion of transportation needs.

audunw 4y ago

You seem to be under the common misconception that it's the energy density of batteries that make them unsafe. This is completely false. There's nothing inherent about battery energy density that makes them more dangerous. What makes LiPo/Li-ion unsafe is that they have a flammable liquid electrolyte in the middle, that's both responsible for starting the fire (the explosion you see with some battery fires) and for failing to keep the anode/cathode separated afterwards. LiFePo doesn't have significantly less energy density, but they're far safer. Same with sodium batteries. Solid state lithium ion batteries have more energy density than Li-Ion/LiPo in some cases, but are generally far more safe, since there's no flammable electrolyte. EVs, even with LiPo/Li-ion, are FAR safer than ICE vehicles, there's just no competition. Lots of oil and gasoline being piped around, with potential for leaks + old electrical wiring = recipe for disaster. We had a huge parking garage fire here in Norway recently, started - as they often do - by an ICE vehicle. Lots of EVs in the garage, but not a SINGLE EV battery pack caught fire. If all of them were EVs, the fire would be far less serious (the interior of the cars still burned, but that's all). EV battery fires are tricky to extinguish, I'll give you that. But the fire department here in Norway say they already have the needed training/experience, and make it clear that EVs are far better for fire safety in general. As for your points on whether they're better for longer distance, personal journeys.. I mean, yeah.. at some point they are. If you're driving 1000km in a day I'd definitely agree. But how many people do that often? * far higher energy density: don't forget to account for efficiency and regenerative breaking (hybrids get some of that benefit, but then you get all the downsides of both technologies) .. practical range difference is much closer than what your numbers would indicate. For most people the range of EVs is good enough, even for long trips. * essentially immediate "recharge" time: Yeah, but it's still a couple of minutes and you have to stand there while it's filling. Almost every single road-trip charging session for me has been: 1. spend 30 seconds plugging in and beeping the payment card (with Tesla you don't even have to do this). 2. walk into a restaurant/cafe/grocery store and take a pee, drink some coffee, buy groceries for the trip, etc.. 3. come back to a fully charged car * 100+ years of ICE drivetrain expertise: This is totally pointless. The only reason you need that expertise with ICE drivetrain is because it's so hard to maintain. Most EVs simply don't have anything to maintain, other than what all cars have (break pads, air filters, etc.). And I've never heard anyone here in Norway having trouble getting their EV fixed due to inexperience. The training isn't hard. You can even get people to change individual battery cells on some cars now. * The last point I covered above.

foxhill 4y ago
> You seem to be under the common misconception that it's the energy density of batteries that make them unsafe. not at all. in fact, i said their (comparatively) low energy density is what makes them safe. that low energy density is a problem for range, places a lower bound on the size of vehicle, and somehow fixing that issue will make battery storage a far less safe option. > There's nothing inherent about battery energy density that makes them more dangerous. yes, their absolutely is - gasoline requires air to burn. batteries store energy, and they can discharge that energy without any other materials: a battery could burn in space. > What makes LiPo/Li-ion unsafe is that they have a flammable liquid electrolyte in the middle. well its the combination of the electrolyte and the metals that make the battery the battery, it wouldn't be battery without it. > EVs, even with LiPo/Li-ion, are FAR safer than ICE vehicles, there's just no competition. indeed, and i don't disagree. i think you may have misunderstood what i was trying to say about about safety here: i'm not trying to suggest that gasoline vehicles are inherently safer, at all. i'm saying that if you were to create a battery technology that was even 10x more energy dense, i.e. 10MJ/kg, you'd have great difficulty in making that vehicle safe. > But the fire department here in Norway say they already have the needed training/experience, and make it clear that EVs are far better for fire safety in general. once the battery has started burning, it has basically inextinguishable. "clear the area" is the only option you'd have. > As for your points on whether they're better for longer distance, personal journeys.. I mean, yeah.. at some point they are. If you're driving 1000km in a day I'd definitely agree. But how many people do that often? in Europe? probably not much. in the US? India? Pakistan? > [...] For most people the range of EVs is good enough, even for long trips. likely true, and, as i mentioned, EVs have a place. > Almost every single road-trip charging session for me has been: 1. spend 30 seconds plugging in and beeping the payment card (with Tesla you don't even have to do this). 2. walk into a restaurant/cafe/grocery store and take a pee, drink some coffee, buy groceries for the trip, etc.. 3. come back to a fully charged car well there's a couple of issues there - adding 30/45 minutes to a journey like that might not be suitable for everyone. traumatic charge rates (above 4C) are not good for the battery, too. > The only reason you need that expertise with ICE drivetrain is because it's so hard to maintain. well even the linked video states that this isn't really the case these days for ICE vehicles, a point i largely agree with. regardless, if gasoline could be recovered from the atmosphere - closing the CO2 cycle - what would be so bad about this? as it stands, with EVs alone, we're pushing the costs of a complete infrastructure change over to individuals. sure, government assistance might help us here in the west, but that's not the world a lot of people live in.

lnsru 4y ago

How often are you driving more than 300 miles a day? For me it’s 4-6 times a year. Otherwise I take a plane. I can live with one 20 minute charging stop for each journey. The electric vehicle model variety today is amazing. From luxury Lucid Air and EQS to Dacia Spring and even EQV van. And it’s growing! Everything is there. Charging at home is also game changer. It’s cheap and convenient. I don’t really want go back to petrol car.

foxhill 4y ago
i'd say about the same - less than 10 times a year. this isn't just about us as individuals; we still have buses, taxi's, rental cars, service cars, trucks, car-sharing, planes, etc. few of these can viably use batteries (and when they can there's usually an additional consequence). not with out either a significant increase in energy density - which has its own risks - or another massive investment in things like rapid battery exchange. great, your vehicle works for you. as i said, EVs have a significant role to play in our society. i don't want you to throw away your EV or have it taken from you. all i'm saying is that i believe gasoline to be a better energy storage mechanism for a significant proportion of transportation needs.