3 ms·
Further elaborating on that, I'd like to see what kind of electrical infra you need to (even partially) charge 20k cars in 5 minutes. That's about one Tsar Bo
by moralestapia 4y ago
Further elaborating on that,
I'd like to see what kind of electrical infra you need to (even partially) charge 20k cars in 5 minutes.
That's about one Tsar Bomba of energy.
- neon_electro 4y agoIt’s a red herring. We don’t need to do that.
- brightball 4y agoThis problem specifically is why I keep an eye on the Graphene Aluminum Ion battery technology coming from Graphene Manufacturing Group. Graphene has seemed to be the key to rapid charging while maintaining temperatures for over a decade. The challenge was always getting enough usable graphene at low cost without mining.
- philipkglass 4y agoI'd like to see what kind of electrical infra you need to (even partially) charge 20k cars in 5 minutes. That's about one Tsar Bomba of energy. This is too high by 4 orders of magnitude. 100 kWh is a larger than average battery capacity for a contemporary BEV [1]. That's 2000 MWh for 20,000 vehicles charging from empty (modulo charging inefficiencies). 1 megaton is 4.18 * 10^15 joules or 1,162,000 MWh [2] while the Tsar Bomba had a yield of at least 50 megatons as tested [3]. So charging 20k electric cars from empty requires about 0.003% as much energy as the Tsar Bomba released. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Battery [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
- moralestapia 4y agoYou're right, I jumped from kWh -> TWh, where it should've been kWh -> GWh. Still, if you look at power, that much energy moving in 5 minutes is about 24GW. That's massive. Unless I'm wrong with numbers again :P.