----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Kuehn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:22 AM
Subject: RE: Cross country charging challenge/Opinion


> Humphrey, Timothy wrote:
>
> >The ICE chase vehicle or anybody else's for that matter couldn't make it
> >across country either, except for the fact that there is a (500kw? or
more?)
> >recharging station every 3.6 miles.
> >
> >Like Pete says, give me a 45kw recharge station every 100 miles and it
can
> >be done alone. Since the infrastructure doesn't exist (I mean isn't
tapped
> >yet) we'll have to bring our own.
>
> Yes, but that multi-kilowatt "recharge" that the ICE gets takes five
> minutes, including the time it takes to fork over the money (at least
> on any modern credit-based pump).  Your 100-mile range EV will
> typically take 4-8 hours for its recharge.  The country is about 2800
> miles across, depending on exactly where you are crossing it, so
> you've just added a minimum of about 100 hours - which is to say,
> more than 4 full days - to your cross-country trip.  Seems to me that
> this is not going to convince anyone that an EV is terribly useful
> invention.
>
> The way to "prove" EVs to people who may otherwise have doubts is to
> use them in everyday applications that maximize their strengths and
> minimize their weaknesses.  Commuting is perfect for this.  EVs waste
> no energy at stops or in traffic jams, the range limitation is
> minimized (particularly if charging can be done during the day at the
> office), the environmental benefits are maximized, and a
> purpose-built EV can be optimized for this use.  One things battery
> EVs are unlikely ever to be is the sole vehicle for a one-car family.
> So design and marketing efforts should stress their use as a
> special-purpose "errand" vehicle for a two-or-more-car family.  In
> that niche market, I think battery EVs could eventually be a
> significant success.
>
> Efforts to convince doubters should be specifically targeted at that
> use group, in my view.
>
> --
>
> -Adam Kuehn
>
>

Reply via email to