Lithium Ion. It gets 220miles on a 53kWh battery. 58?kWh * $0.10 / 220mils * 45 miles = $1.19 TDI Jetta uses diesel right? That's around $2.10-$2.20 yes?
It would be more like 66KWH. What you are missing is that the battery charger wastes energy. 65 * $.13/220 *45 miles = 1.76
I just read the wiki article. 2.98Mi/KWH thats 15KWH for 45 miles at $0.13 is $1.95 So average gas price is 1.785 and the car has equivilent to 41MPG and crap range.
please link me the provider that offers those energy rates. I will switch today. and take note these are tests that the company is doing itself, there is no standard test for these cars yet. The EPA cycle they are talking about is biased to electric cars. City stop and go is where electric excels. plus these guys are less than trustworthy as they are claiming 135mpg equivilent. Even with your fudged numbers that is a load of BS.
\ yeah thats obviously the meaning of this thread. geez you are both completely ignorant and love to dish out opinions and conclusions based on your lack of knowledge.
Here is the deal saitou. I do not know much about batteries or electric cars, but it seems like this Tesla is making some major compromises for range and mi/KWH. First it is tiny and super light. Without the huge battery it weighs 1500 pounds. Thats LIGHT LIGHT. Also the battery is $35K, and the motor is huge and expensive which results in nice performance but also results in high efficiency. So it has sacrificed cost and weight to get decent range and ability to drive on the highway. I say decent range cause 70% after 50K is 160 miles under the ideal conditions they claimed to have used. If the same system was put into an ideal sized car it would weigh 700 pounds more than the TDI, (which is twice as much as its current weight) and the mi/KWH would drop like a rock. So even under best conditions an electric car got ~25% better milage. If the playing fields were even it would be worse.
What IS the point of this thread? Seriously, I want to know what you think. And nice sh** talking there, when in the very next post: You're pointing out that current battery tech doesn't provide the same horsepower/mileage/etc for your dollar/weight/etc. That's clear. I agree. What I don't understand is the attitude that the tech isn't worth investing in. This is the same nonsensical attitude I see when people get almost angry about investing in solar/wind. Yes, we don't have the kilowatt per dollar matched to coal, but it's shrinking all the time. The potential payoffs for investing in battery research are huge. It's political (weaning us off of foreign oil,) ecological, and could provide the USA a chance to become a leader in producing a product the world needs. There's this odd attitude that we are in stasis- that the exact rate of improvement in battery tech last decade and the decade before is the same we will have this decade. I think that's naive. We may not see something like Moore's Law in battery performance, but I'll bet we'll see something significant. We will see significant improvements in horsepower and mileage per pound, and much sooner than 10 years. How soon will it match combustion engines? We can't be sure, but the potential payoff is worth the investment. As for price, somehow economy of scale is always ignored in these debates, whether it's cars or solar or whatever. The discovery, drilling, refining, and delivery of petroleum operates on a MASSIVE economy of scale worldwide. It is much, much cheaper per gallon because of it. Building huge batteries for cars is new and does not operate on such a scale. You need a big buyer to guarantee thousands or more of units built to get infrastructure in place to lower the costs of production. The US govt is the big buyer that will get this ball rolling towards higher performance for lower cost. It's a good thing. The innovations being worked on right now in battery, solar, wind, are staggering. Ultracapacitors and nanotubes in battery tech are just two examples of many that would revolutionize the entire industry if they make working prototypes. Will all of these amazing ideas pan out? Hell no. But if one in twenty, one in fifty does, bam- the entire game is changed. I believe we will see this kind of game changing development.
http://www.texaselectricrate.com/ Search for Houston Area Best month to month plan: Startex power 10cents per kWh I'll show you the quote again: I'm assuming combined means highway + city 135mpg is their own calculation that factors in the energy efficiency of the electric power grid. I agree that it's disingenuous to stick on a mpg rating to a car that doesn't use gallons of gasoline. But if the EPA bothers you so much forget about it, it hasn't been brought up by me or anyone else so far. We don't need it to calculate cost when we know the mileage it gets on the battery it uses. And fudged numbers? I'm using the plug-to-wheel efficiency stated in the same article you used for your numbers first, except I used the numbers of the latest test in August 2008 not August 2007. I guess the numbers are only fudged when they don't work in your favour. Since you quoted my question but still declined to answer, the average price I found of diesel in texas is $2.10-$2.20 per gallon (you can correct this if it is wrong). The fact that the Jetta uses diesel is important because you are saying cost wise the tesla is a 41mpg car based on the price of gasoline. Based on the price of gasoline, the Jetta is closer to a 37mpg car (and still a very good one). And at $1.26per 45miles, cost-wise the tesla is a 63mpg car. It is. Obviously if you bought a corolla it would be a lot cheaper. See my 2nd post in this thread, I'm not trying to say otherwise. The fact is the price of your electricity bill will be significantly cheaper than your gas bill if you went electric - that's my point. On the larger issue of whether electric cars will ever be viable, in the next few years definitely no, but I'm optimistic for the future. Besides initial cost as you've mentioned, one big issue I see is that with current battery constraints the best place for using electric cars are in dense urbans areas, however a lot of people in these areas live in apartments (like me), and these people can't just plug in their cars at the garage. Public charging points would have to be built, or a battery swap system where you pay a monthly fee to rent the battery will be needed, but such systems at the moment are very expensive.
OK this has gotton out of hand. Lets recap Someone asked about price of gas vs price of electricity. You said electric is much cheaper. This is false. You have shown that it is 1.35 per 45 miles on a car made for MPH on a superlight frame. On a chassis that people can actually live with the cost per mile will be over gas. Do you disagree? Also I am not against electric cars, I agree they will be ideal for urban area commuters. Quiet, smog free. When they are cost effective I freaking want one. (I know it is gonna happen) But the bottom line is battery tech and range and cost of the batteries does not matter. You can improve those all you want to. The wattage needed does not touch gas (unless gas goes back to 4 bucks)
Well, not that I dont enjoy a number crunching contest......but I'd have to say that although I'm not exactly a battery expert, I have done some battery research and have read a decent amount of literature on solid polymer electrolyte batteries. These batteries aren't quite there yet performance-wise, but once the research is advanced enough they will totally replace all of the current lithium polymer batteries, which are really just polymers impregnated with a liquid (still bad for the environment when disposed of). I think solar energy combined with battery technology will be advanced enough in the next 50 years to get rid of gasoline-powered vehicles.
I stand by what I said - I have shown that the price of electricity is much cheaper for two existing electric cars. Yes they are superlight and they are aimed at a niche market, but there are actually people who have bought these cars and 'live with' them. The tesla is so expensive in part because of the light materials used, but it gives good performance and I believe the price-tag isn't as bad when compared with other sports cars that give that type of performance. On a heavier chasis that most people would use, this is what you said earlier about the price of charging the volt: $1.50 isn't good I admit, but still cheaper than gas. And assuming 10cents per kWh it comes down to $1 for 40 miles which is good. I see the point you are making, but wattage on light cars surpass gas, and the Volt is at worst close to gas. Advances in battery technology can improve wattage efficiency if they are smaller and lighter, saving total weight. So there's still hope
I've read a lot about Nikola Tesla (invented AC current) and the story that he invented an electric car that was powered wirelessly. I don't know much about electricity or wireless transfer of energy, so I'm wondering is this stuff even possible? http://www.waterpoweredcar.com/teslascar.html That's the first link that came up in Google, but if any of you are interested just search for it.
If VW could make the Jetta 1000 pounds lighter for free they would. The sad fact is they would have to use tons of aluminum or even composites. If you take the battery out of the Tesla it still costs 3 times as much as the Jetta which should clue you in.
