Thread: EV general discussion

So talking about studies that are not available to the public.

This is a good summary that is allegedly from Mitsubishi that is claimed to have been presented at a media briefing earlier this year, but was never released to the public. It was being used to justify why Mitsubishi believe the best EV (outside of Europe) is a PHEV on balance.



Again we don’t know the assumptions they have used, but the point they are making is their Life Cycle Analysis data shows that EV cars manufactured in China and sold in China or Australia will contribute more CO2 emissions than an ICE. This is based on China and Australia having some of the dirtiest power generation in the world.

By comparison they also support that EV cars manufactured in Europe and sold in Europe will have lower emissions over its life cycle compared to an ICE.

Mitsubishi’s argument is what is good for Europe is not good for the rest of the world, similar to the view held by Toyota, and for this reason why PHEV’s should be seen as a viable alternative.

From the Mitsubishi analysis, for us in Australia they would advocate buying a BEV (or PHEV) made in Europe, and then use renewables for charging. The next best compromise would be to buy from Japan or Thailand.

It looks like a credible point of view as the analysis is comparable to the comprehensive reporting done by Volvo which is publicly available.

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

So talking about studies that are not available to the public.

This is a good summary that is allegedly from Mitsubishi that is claimed to have been presented at a media briefing earlier this year, but was never released to the public. It was being used to justify why Mitsubishi believe the best EV (outside of Europe) is a PHEV on balance.



Again we don’t know the assumptions they have used, but the point they are making is their Life Cycle Analysis data shows that EV cars manufactured in China and sold in China or Australia will contribute more CO2 emissions than an ICE. This is based on China and Australia having some of the dirtiest power generation in the world.

By comparison they also support that EV cars manufactured in Europe and sold in Europe will have lower emissions over its life cycle compared to an ICE.

Mitsubishi’s argument is what is good for Europe is not good for the rest of the world, similar to the view held by Toyota, and for this reason why PHEV’s should be seen as a viable alternative.

From the Mitsubishi analysis, for us in Australia they would advocate buying a BEV (or PHEV) made in Europe, and then use renewables for charging. The next best compromise would be to buy from Japan or Thailand.

It looks like a credible point of view as the analysis is comparable to the comprehensive reporting done by Volvo.

The Method of attributing or denning C02 emissions via the Kyoto Protocol is to the source of the fuel! I put a link in another thread on Biofuel burning North American wood pellets for electricity in an allegedly LOW C02 emitting EU country. The C02 is attribute to North America! Total rubbish! As we export a Significant amount of cheap gas to Japan from the North West Shelf guess where the accounting happens?

Lies dammed lies and statistics.


Back to batteries

"The official news is that the Tesla Cybertruck will be equipped with Tesla's 4680-type cylindrical battery cells - an improved version, with a 10 percent higher energy density than in the case of the Tesla Model Y AWD (the first and only 4680-powered BEV so far).Today, we will stop for a while to check out interesting estimations of potential energy consumption and battery capacity, recently published by Troy Teslike.
The report assumes battery energy density at:

• Gen 1 (4680-type): 229 Wh/kg
  81.2 Wh per cell, 355 g
  
• Gen 2 (4680-type): 252 Wh/kg (10% boost)
  89.4 Wh per cell, 355 g
  
• Panasonic (2170-type): 262 Wh/kg
  18.4 Wh per cell, 70 g

As we can see, the new "Cybercell" is expected to offer a slightly lower energy density than Panasonic's 2170-type cylindrical cells, but the difference is small (4 percent), while the new structural battery pack might bring substantial weight savings on the car level. Another thing is that it's actually not bad for an automotive company to be so close to Panasonic's technology, while there might still be substantial untapped potential in the larger cell format."

From "The Long Range version potentially might have a battery that's two times bigger than the Tesla Model Y at 160 kWh.

"

The interesting thing about several current testing on solid state batteries is that all of the above is



That none of the current EVs are being build for ease of battery replacement is bit of a PITA! Adding significant more power and range with significantly less size and weight to existing EV will be a item worth watching possibly? My battery may weight in at 250kg. That several battery weights can fit in mine is known. 42 to 72 kWh.

Appreciate the software would also require changing for the charge rates and other important bits!.

A Long Range tank on my Gold Disco gave it over 1000km range! About a 40to 60% increase in range from the one tank

Suspect if I could change my current 42kWh battery to a Quantum scape solid state Battery at 380-500 Wh/kg"

That may be 300+ percent more than mine! As a ratio it may make the LR tank on the disco look a poor investments for the range increase? Horses for courses of course!

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

The Method of attributing or denning C02 emissions via the Kyoto Protocol is to the source of the fuel!

Not sure that is the basis of the Mitsubishi analysis. It looks to be purely based on the in country power generation with the fuel source attributed directly to the country using that energy.

China and Australia average is around 600g/kWh based on current energy mix (but is coming down and at similar rates of improvement). The problem for us in Victoria is brown coal which generates 1200g/kWh.

By comparison Sweden power generation, which is 99% renewables or nuclear (70/30 split), is under 50g/kWh. This is going to be a problem for Volvo as they shift more manufacturing to China.

But yes - please get us back to discussing the technical topics.

Originally Posted by Saitch

I've been finding this thread entertaining and informative.

Please don't turn it into a 'Popcorn Eating' one.

I'm sure there is a lot of information supplied across the whole AULRO forum, of which the sources are confidential, by necessity.

Especially if one has got a bit on the side.

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

Back to batteries

With Toyota (and others) on the verge of commercialising solid state batteries, I definitely would not be buying an EV right now.

If Toyota deliver on an EV with a 1200km range and 10 minute charging time, over night they will make every EV that came before this obsolete. Especially as a 400-600km range could potentially be recharged in 5 minutes or less.

The motivation for Toyota making these claims is they know they have a lot of catching up to do, but they want buyers to hold off.

Of course, the infrastructure needed to deliver this sort of power is going to be incredible - like 1,000kW chargers! Which is what Tesla claim the Semi and Cybertruck will be able to be charged at.

Personally I think Toyota are taking cue cards from Tesla by making big outlandish claims, but wow - what a claim!

1000KW chargers everywhere…. hmmm…

Originally Posted by Tombie

Random side note: our 2 wheel hobby is pretty nasty too, CF is incredibly energy and emissions intense, Al is pretty messy too (although 14 times less than CF) and the bikes 2 legged engines are huge CO2 emitters over their total lifespan


Keep safe, enjoy life….

FYI I gave up on carbon bikes after I realised they typically only lasted a couple of years and then ended up in a skip. They lasted ok as long as people don't ride them much.

So I use titanium bikes. I don't even want to think about that manufacture. But it's only a bit over 1kg of titanium, and us up to nearly 50,000k now. I've no plans to replace it. The last bike I bought wast steel.

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

With Toyota (and others) on the verge of commercialising solid state batteries, I definitely would not be buying an EV right now.

If Toyota deliver on an EV with a 1200km range and 10 minute charging time, over night they will make every EV that came before this obsolete. Especially as a 400-600km range could potentially be recharged in 5 minutes or less.

The motivation for Toyota making these claims is they know they have a lot of catching up to do, but they want buyers to hold off.

Of course, the infrastructure needed to deliver this sort of power is going to be incredible - like 1,000kW chargers! Which is what Tesla claim the Semi and Cybertruck will be able to be charged at.

Personally I think Toyota are taking cue cards from Tesla by making big outlandish claims, but wow - what a claim!

Fake it till you make it? "Please don't buy an EV now - Toyota."

There is only one reason why car companies talk about products in development and that is they want to limit sales losses to competitors.

Solid state batteries: Toyota has history of talking big on EV breakthrough, but not delivering