The future of energy generation and storage

[Value Collector]

I don't think so. When you do those tractive effort calcs for gear box ratio selections, do you use 6% or the actual power? You know what the irreversible losses (e.g. friction, combustion heat, etc) are so what's left is the work extraction efficiency.

Sure there are drivetrain losses, etc, but ~30-32% is a number you should be using.

No, 32% is the efficiency of the engine itself, thats how much energy is left to be transferred to actually go into mechanical power.

However, trying to use this power output to power the drive chain of the car directly means you can never capture the full 32% because

1, When the engine is idling, none of the energy is being used to move the car, ( electric cars don't idle, think of your electric drill, you only start using power when you pull the trigger)

2, When it comes time to slow down for that red light or down hill, you waste all that energy you used to create the forward momentum, in friction with the brakes, (electric cars can recoup some through regen braking)

3, some of the power is also lost operating water pumps and fans just to cool the engine.

This is what I mean when I say Electric cars use the energy in a more effective way, But not only that, they can also get their energy input from more efficient systems than traditional refined oil petrol and diesel powered combustion engines.

 

[Value Collector]

This short video / article from the union of concerned scientists explains why electric cars beat petrol cars.

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WWxiysZL2Po




Not to mention that as time goes on the grid is going to get cleaner and cleaner, while Oil production gets more and more dirty.

check out this Oil sand Mine, they have to spend Diesel, Natural gas and electricity just to source and refine the sand into Oil, and thats before the Oil itself needs to be transported, refined in petrol, transported again and then used inefficiently.

 

[Wysiwyg]

I heard someone on the radio asking why Australia doesn't prcess it's natural resources. I think for the lithium mines that would be a smart idea to process the spodumene to lithium here, instead it is sent overseas to be processed. Must be too expensive to process in Australia. Goes something like -- here, process our ore and sell us back the useful stuff. Duh.

 

[sptrawler]

I heard someone on the radio asking why Australia doesn't prcess it's natural resources. I think for the lithium mines that would be a smart idea to process the spodumene to lithium here, instead it is sent overseas to be processed. Must be too expensive to process in Australia. Goes something like -- here, process our ore and sell us back the useful stuff. Duh.

The Chinese are building a plant to produce lithium hydroxide, in Kwinana W.A

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...ssing-plant-gets-green-light-600-jobs/7820452

I can't see why we couldn't build and own it, oh I forgot, we don't own anything.

 

[Tisme]

The Chinese are building a plant to produce lithium hydroxide, in Kwinana W.A

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...ssing-plant-gets-green-light-600-jobs/7820452

I can't see why we couldn't build and own it, oh I forgot, we don't own anything.

The old cultural cringe that permeates our combined national psyche. That and the pursuit of instant high yield ROIs instead of investment in long term growth and guaranteed solid returns like is the Asian way and their 25 year horizons.

 

[sptrawler]

This is what I mean when I say Electric cars use the energy in a more effective way, But not only that, they can also get their energy input from more efficient systems than traditional refined oil petrol and diesel powered combustion engines.

For interest sake, how long do Tesla guarantee their car batteries, from what I've read lithium batteries have a life of around 7 years.
The other thing is, do Tesla guarantee their batteries, to perform as per built specifications? Or is there a built in battery degradation of performance clause?

 

[Tisme]

Once again there is a mismash of terms and conditions. If you are going to use the power station versus car engine you have to line them up. An idling coal fired power station has a different efficiency too but, true, diversity of load will be greater in a car application than a big arsed Parsons machine.

Battery to wheel efficiency is around 68% while fuel tank to wheel efficiency is around 32x 75% = 24%. That's without cylinders on demand unloaders etc. As an IC engine unloads the amount of fuel decreases and efficiency decreases even as stoichiometric ratios increase and knock sensors alter spark timing in an attempt to reduce wasted fuel.


But the shear mass of batteries and electric motors has to be considered.

You can do your own calcs, if you have a decent car with an ECU that gives you average consumption versus travel distance. Work the calorific values back to kWh .

The Tesla car uses 0.2kWh per km . Petrol yields 8.7kWh per litre, which I reckon is going to be 0.24 x 8.7 =~ 2.0 kWh/litre. at the wheels. For an 8 l/100km car that's 16kWh/100km = 0.16kWh per km

 

[Smurf1976]

At one end of the scale, if you're at the end of a long distribution line and the power is coming from an old gas turbine then it could be less than 15% from fuel in the ground to electricity in your home. Worst case, if the fuel was LNG used in an old open cycle gas turbine and it was a hot day and you're at the end of the line then it could be barely 10% efficient. That's an extreme though.

At the other extreme if you're standing right next to a hydro power station and that's the source of power charging your car then you're looking at 90% efficiency. Heck, even ye olde working museum (aka Lake Margaret power station, built 1914) achieves 80% efficiency.

Realistically though most won't be charging their car in the middle of nowhere during a heatwave and most won't be parking literally outside a power station either.

For the vast majority of thermal plant in operation in Australia the efficiency is in the range of 30% to about 37%. There's some below that (worst are down around 20%) and some above that (best is a bit over 50% for a stand alone fossil fuel power station) but the vast majority of power actually generated is coming from plants with efficiency in that range. That's the efficiency of the power station only.

Now take out the energy required to extract the fuel from the ground, process and transport it. How much that is varies hugely but it's typically only a few % thankfully.

Then take out energy loss in transmission and distribution. For a typical suburban house that's about 10% of what comes out of the power station is lost in transmission and, more importantly, distribution.

Put all that together and as a generic answer grid electricity is very close to 30% efficient from fuel in the ground to power in your home. Higher in some places, lower in others and it will also vary with time of day and seasonally but as a whole that 30% is typical.

So in the context of electric vehicle charging in Australia, 30% is a reasonable figure to use for the efficiency (fuel in ground to power in your home) of grid electricity although the actual figure will vary depending on circumstances.

As for electric vehicles, my personal view is that yes it will happen but not as quickly as many are expecting or hoping. We're a minimum 30 years away from the point where seeing any petrol / diesel powered vehicle being driven on public roads becomes unusual to the point that such a vehicle stands out among the rest.

People often look at devices such as mobile phones and extrapolate the short lifespan (in practice) of those to other things. But that tends to fail in practice.

Go stand beside any public road looking for cars from the 1990's being driven. It won't take you long to spot one, at least not unless you intentionally go looking in a wealthy suburb but anywhere else there's still plenty around.

There's still plenty of heavy industrial equipment from the 1980's in use today.

Those with $ to splurge might do it differently but in practice there's no shortage of major appliances being used in Australian homes which date from last century.

Overall, the turnover time for all this stuff is longer than many (particularly government) seem to assume.

Hypothetically there's a transition over the next decade so that 10 years from now all new vehicles are EV's. Do that and it'll be well into the 2040's when petrol consumption has fallen to the point that it's no longer viable to run a business based around selling it.

All that said, if you really go into it then you'll find that petrol and diesel have oh so many evils from toxicity through to terrorism. Even if there's no benefit to efficiency or the environment and we generate 100% of the power from coal that still beats petrol or diesel in many ways simply because it gets us off the oil addiction.

 

[sptrawler]

Put all that together and as a generic answer grid electricity is very close to 30% efficient from fuel in the ground to power in your home. Higher in some places, lower in others and it will also vary with time of day and seasonally but as a whole that 30% is typical.

When you compare that to a small diesel, it really isn't that great.
I do agree, electric or fuel cell cars, will become the norm in the long term.
However, the increase in the efficiency of diesels and petrol engines, will see them used for a very long time.
Also IMO, Tesla will be in the news, for all the wrong reasons in the future.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...ion-loses-13000-car-made-ahead-model-3-launch

If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck.
Only my opinion and I have been wrong, on countless occassions.

 

[Value Collector]

For interest sake, how long do Tesla guarantee their car batteries, from what I've read lithium batteries have a life of around 7 years.
The other thing is, do Tesla guarantee their batteries, to perform as per built specifications? Or is there a built in battery degradation of performance clause?

The whole battery degradation thing is a non issue, the batteries will out live the car, they are expected to have over 90% of their original capacity after 10years.

 

[Value Collector]

When you compare that to a small diesel, it really isn't that great.

You are a bit confused, smurf is talking about how efficient the energy is delivered to user, that's part 1 of the story, part 1 is about comparing the grid to the oil supply chain, eg that litre of diesel doesn't just appear at the service station, it has to be produced, refined and transported which is a very energy intensive process, where a lot of the energy content of the oil is lost

So when people say a Diesel engine operates at 30% efficiency, that's 30% of the energy in diesel put in the tank makes it out of the engine as potentially usable, but before the diesel got into the tank there has already been huge energy losses during its production and transport.

part 2 is how efficiently the vehicle uses that energy, once it gets loaded onto the vehicle, again electric cars use this power much more efficiently than ice cars, because of that 30% of "usable energy" that leaves the engine a large portion is lost due to idling, non regenative braking and other incidentals, even the hybrids that burn unleaded onboard the vehicle to produce electricity get more km's per litre than the cars that use it to power the drive chain mechanically.

 

[Value Collector]

The Tesla car uses 0.2kWh per km . Petrol yields 8.7kWh per litre, which I reckon is going to be 0.24 x 8.7 =~ 2.0 kWh/litre. at the wheels. For an 8 l/100km car that's 16kWh/100km = 0.16kWh per km

I think the comparison of the Chevy volt and the Chevy Cruze is a good example of how electric drive chains are superior.

The Chevy volt drives about 20% further on a 1L of fuel than the Cruze, both burn fuel in a cumbustion engine , except the Volt uses the engine to run an electrical generator where as the Cruze uses it to power a mechanical drive chain.

If there were no benefit to the electrical drive chain the Cruze and the volt should have the same mileage, or the Cruze should beat the volt.

Then when you factor in the ev only mode of the volt when it's charged via plug in rather than using the engine, the running costs halve.

 

[sptrawler]

You are a bit confused, smurf is talking about how efficient the energy is delivered to user, that's part 1 of the story, part 1 is about comparing the grid to the oil supply chain, eg that litre of diesel doesn't just appear at the service station, it has to be produced, refined and transported which is a very energy intensive process, where a lot of the energy content of the oil is lost

So when people say a Diesel engine operates at 30% efficiency, that's 30% of the energy in diesel put in the tank makes it out of the engine as potentially usable, but before the diesel got into the tank there has already been huge energy losses during its production and transport.

part 2 is how efficiently the vehicle uses that energy, once it gets loaded onto the vehicle, again electric cars use this power much more efficiently than ice cars, because of that 30% of "usable energy" that leaves the engine a large portion is lost due to idling, non regenative braking and other incidentals, even the hybrids that burn unleaded onboard the vehicle to produce electricity get more km's per litre than the cars that use it to power the drive chain mechanically.

Well no matter how you want to dress it up.
I can travel from Perth to Sydney on 4 tanks of diesel.
Be that in a Jeep 3L which will use about 350litres, or in a VW Golf that will use about 231 litres.
I doubt anyone can travel from Perth to Sydney in an electric vehicle, even if they could, stopping every 400k's to recharge wouldn't cut it.

 

[sptrawler]

So when people say a Diesel engine operates at 30% efficiency, that's 30% of the energy in diesel put in the tank makes it out of the engine as potentially usable, but before the diesel got into the tank there has already been huge energy losses during its production and transport.
.

This is the other problem with your quotes, the diesel cycle is about 50% efficient, you seem to quote figures of the Otto cycle, as representing the diesel cycle.
It makes me wonder if you have studied thermodynamics, or are just quoting internet snippets?
Or maybe quoting Tesla's advertising?

 

[orr]

To explain what I mean, the Holden/chevy Volt, Is a fully electric car with a built in Petrol engine used drive a generator to charge a battery (it can also be plugged in).

Its petrol engine does not power the drive chain of the car directly, when it burns petrol it is simply charging the battery.

By using the petrol motor to charge the battery, the motor can sit at its peak load/RPM efficiency, meaning it can operate more effectively than an engine who's load/RPM have to keep fluctuating and sometimes just idles at traffic lights, and can't recoup energy through regen braking.

The Chevy Volt in Petrol mode uses 5.64 Litres / 100km, it's sister vehicle the chevy Cruze uses 7.4L / 100km.

--------------------------

However, Combustion engines only operate at around 25% efficiency, So an electric vehicle charged using the grid where efficiency is often over 60%, is even more efficient than the chevy volt style of hybrid.

using home solar, even better.

But yeah, in Rumpoles hypothetical world where electric vehicles some how lower the price of petrol to less than the price of electricity, electric cars could be charged using petrol generators and still be better than ICE cars (but that won't happen)

One thing also I'll add to the information above on the Chevy Volt; It's my understanding that as the first Volts rolled off the production line, circa 6 years ago the cost of battery storage/kwh was in the realm of $1000US/kwh as of October last year(2016) the price was down to $140US/kwh. It is Tesla's objective to be under $100/kwh as the production of the Model3 ramps up.

Work currently being undertaken will likely see increases in capacity of Lithium Ion batteries;

https://qz.com/929794/has-lithium-b...nough-done-it-again-colleagues-are-skeptical/

John Goodenough does have a few runs on the board in this regard, he was after all instrumental in the development of the modern Lithium ion battery, working at he time with Panasonic, Tesla current partner in the GigaFactory... And there is more than a few on a similar quest.

My personal opinion is that the market is gagging for a for an all electric One-tonne pickup... The Ford F100 and GM equiverlent were the most profitable vehicals every produced by these companies.

 

[Value Collector]

I doubt anyone can travel from Perth to Sydney in an electric vehicle, even if they could, stopping every 400k's to recharge wouldn't cut it.

Why not?

The Brisbane to Sydney route is already completed with super chargers. I am not sure how popular the Sydney to Perth route is but if it is there is nothing stopping it.

You can already drive from LA to New York, and London to Moscow.

After 4 hours of driving most people don't mind stopping for 30minutes to stretch, do a wee and have a burger.

Not to mention the latest supercharger has a charger will charge a car in 15minutes, Andy this will start to be rolled out this year.

 

[Value Collector]

This is the other problem with your quotes, the diesel cycle is about 50% efficient, you seem to quote figures of the Otto cycle, as representing the diesel cycle.
It makes me wonder if you have studied thermodynamics, or are just quoting internet snippets?
Or maybe quoting Tesla's advertising?

you are missing the point, the point is that regardless even if you use the same engine with the same fuel, an electric drive chain beats a mechanical one.

If you used your beloved Diesel engine to power a generator, that powered an electic drive chain in your car like the chevy volt, you would get more kilometers per liter.

The second part of the story is that if you simply burned the entire barrel of oil to generate the electricity rather than just the refined product, it would be even more efficient.

 

[Tisme]

I think the comparison of the Chevy volt and the Chevy Cruze is a good example of how electric drive chains are superior.

The Chevy volt drives about 20% further on a 1L of fuel than the Cruze, both burn fuel in a cumbustion engine , except the Volt uses the engine to run an electrical generator where as the Cruze uses it to power a mechanical drive chain.

If there were no benefit to the electrical drive chain the Cruze and the volt should have the same mileage, or the Cruze should beat the volt.

Then when you factor in the ev only mode of the volt when it's charged via plug in rather than using the engine, the running costs halve.

Once again you are picking the intermediate bits, instead of merely looking at the whole.

We can all add in all sorts of various factors to win an argument; it's a tradition of fans for brands, rear wheel drive versus front wheel, carbs versus injection, turbo versus charger versus nitrous.

I'm not up to speed with the Volt anymore, but I seem to recall the traction motor increasingly becomes inefficient as speed increases, eventually hitting 110 kph a second motor kicks in and drives a planetary gear set. When the battery is cactus the planetary gears are driven by the petrol engine directly. The Volt is an admission that battery electric only cars still not an ubiquitous solution


Traction motors are definitely a proven performer in the rail system for many many decades and should translate into cars well.

 

[moXJO]

My personal opinion is that the market is gagging for a for an all electric One-tonne pickup... The Ford F100 and GM equiverlent were the most profitable vehicals every produced by these companies.

I'd have a look at buying a few.
It would strain those batteries with the loads you would carry though?

Some of the newer battery technology will be the game changer. It will be very cheap and easy to produce. Once these products hit the market, I feel EVs will seriously be looked at.
Mechanics must be looking on with fear.

 

[Tisme]

Mechanics must be looking on with fear.

and electrical fitters with glee