Thread: EV general discussion

Originally Posted by TonyC

And my Defender does approx 110kWh/100km
And has approx 1600kWh of fuel on board.

Accounting for the woeful energy convertion of an ICE engine thats about 33kWh/100km just to push it along.

Based on 10kWh per litre.

Not trying to prove anything, just find it interesting to put things in the same units.

Tony

Yeah nah - never got into the kWh to litres conversions. Never saw the point of this.

Next someone will try to calculate how many kgs of coal is needed per 100km. D’oh!

Edit: ok so I did calculate it - 12 kWh/100km is ~6kg coal per 100km. Noice one!

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

Yeah nah - never got into the kWh to litres conversions. Never saw the point of this.

Next someone will try to calculate how many kgs of coal is needed per 100km. D’oh!

Edit: ok so I did calculate it - 12 kWh/100km is ~6kg coal per 100km. Noice one!

Did you factor in transmission losses

Originally Posted by Tombie

Did you factor in transmission losses

Heh heh - assumed fully offset by the amount of renewables being fed into the grid.

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

Next someone will try to calculate how many kgs of coal is needed per 100km. D’oh!

Edit: ok so I did calculate it - 12 kWh/100km is ~6kg coal per 100km. Noice one!

Suddenly, the Tesla towing its trailer full of coal, seems less modern 😜

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

One country with large empty deserts which is making significant inroads to transitioning to renewable energy is Chile.

How Chile is becoming a leader in renewable energy | World Economic Forum

Wind and solar overtake coal in Chile | Ember

Ouch, how a thread that used to live in general chat which in my opinion was fine got merged with this I will never know but man... When I see "fact check" and "the guardian" in one link and "world economic forum" in the other, which are both contradictions in terms, we have certainly drifted

-P

Originally Posted by prelude

Ouch, how a thread that used to live in general chat which in my opinion was fine got merged with this I will never know but man... When I see "fact check" and "the guardian" in one link and "world economic forum" in the other, which are both contradictions in terms, we have certainly drifted

-P

Even funnier than that - it was the Guardian fact checking a story in the Daily Mail.

But what Chile is doing with renewables is a true story. Very impressive for a country with a lower GDP per capita than Australia.

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

Always thought it makes more sense to talk actual consumption and not estimated range to empty. It’s how we compare fuel economy with ICE vehicles.

12-13 kWh/100km sounds very efficient.

I spoke with a polestar RWD owner this morning. He's more in the 16-18 category. Said at 110 he can see more like 21. Haven't tried the tesla at that speed for far enough to know yet.

Noted non Mr Musk lover! Ready this and thought wow "One of the engineers stated that he was "blown away" by how Tesla was "struggling so much with the basics". According to Wired, the report suggests that the Cybertruck's unusual design resulted in it being hard to fully seal. This in turn resulted in an abundance of noise and leaking issues.The report also claimed that the Cybertruck handled very poorly with lots of body roll, steering issues, and “structural shake". Even worse was braking. Engineers were targeting a braking score of seven, per the Society of Automotive Engineers scoring system. That score would be considered "fair". What did the pre-production Cybertruck achieve in reality? A four, making it somewhat dangerous for public roads.
That said, a lot of work has presumably been done in the past 18 months. After all, Tesla CEO Elon Musk seems very confident about a Q3 launch for the first Cybertruck release candidates. Mass Cybertruck production is scheduled to begin in 2024, with Tesla targeting an output of 375,000 units per year."

whole yarn here!