EV Digest 2605
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Thanks for everything!!! (too long, but hopefully not too boring)
by "Doug Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: You Don't Have to Plug It In!
by Alan Batie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: EV1s waiting,rant, an' stuff
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4) Re: Evercell has reached cycle 352 tonight
by Seth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: EV1s waiting,rant, an' stuff
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6) Re: New Product - AC Drive System
by Jim Coate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: New Product - AC Drive System
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) Re: sunset from space OT
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: EV1s waiting,rant, an\' stuff
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: You Don't Have to Plug It In!
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Field terminals for field weakening.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: LRR Revisited
by Jim Coate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Field terminals for field weakening.
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: ev tax credit question
by Paul G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Evercell has reached cycle 352 tonight
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: EV1s waiting - a hobbyest inspired corporation
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: You Don't Have to Plug It In!
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Evercell has reached cycle 352 tonight
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: ev tax credit question
by Adam Kuehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
* LP8.2: HTML/Attachments detected, removed from message *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 10:32:15PM -0800, Thomas Shay wrote:
> I was a bit surprised by the howls of protests from this discussion
> group when the Insight and Prius were introduced with no way to
> charge them and when the makers touted that as a feature.
>
> On these cars, the electric drive system has so
> little energy storage capacity that very little gasoline could be saved
> by discharging the batteries and recharging them from an electric
> charger.
That's exactly the problem: what we want is something that will do a
limited range on pure electric and only go gas when you need to go
farther. 10-20 miles would be ideal, but heck, even 5 miles @ 35-45mph
would get you to the park-n-ride or the store and back on pure electric.
That's what they're pushing the NEVs for, but they're not building them
like a real car (e.g. most of the ones I've seen are open and not suited
for inclement weather), and your plans don't always stay the same as when
you left the house...
--
Alan Batie ______ alan.batie.org Me
alan at batie.org \ / www.qrd.org The Triangle
PGPFP DE 3C 29 17 C0 49 7A \ / www.pgpi.com The Weird Numbers
27 40 A5 3C 37 4A DA 52 B9 \/ spamassassin.taint.org NO SPAM!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That's all well and maybe good, but what does the business plan tell you
about a market for selling a hundred thousand plus EVs and not just a few
hundred sports cars ?
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 22:22:50 -0800 Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Only problem with the $25000 to $35000 Tango is that it cannot
> compete
> > economically with a $ 10000 Echo that gets 35 miles per gallon.
>
> As soon as you want the cheapest solution, you are guaranteeing the
> status quo wins. The cheapest solution is ALWAYS to use what you've
> already got, what's already been done; don't do anything new or
> different.
>
> When you decide to "go" for an EV, you have made a decision NOT to
> decide on price or economics. You know it will cost more, but are
> choosing to do it for other reasons.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard
> Cohen
>
>
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I realize this wasn't a healthy battery to begin with, but the trend
doesn't lend itself to believe that NiZn will have a much greater life
than lead-acid.
Seth
Joe Smalley wrote:
>
> The graphic can be viewed at
> http://www.manzanitamicro.com/evercel%20cycle%20352%20summary.gif
>
> Joe Smalley
> Rural Kitsap County WA
> Fiesta 48 volts
> NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, so how many kick in the pants cars has AC Propulsion sold ?????????
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 10:21:49 -0500 "Chris Tromley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> billglic wrote:
>
> > Only problem with the $ 25000 to $ 35000 Tango is that it can
> > not compete economically with a $ 10000 Echo that gets 35
> > miles per gallon. Gasoline will need to atleast triple in
> > price before the average person could financially justify a
> > Tango or any other EV or Hybrid of similar high cost.
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> I think you're talking about two entirely different demographics.
> It's
> a little like saying a $35k Corvette can't compete with a $10k Echo.
> Most people won't buy a Tango because they want to save the earth.
> They'll buy it because it's such a kick in the pants. These people
> wouldn't even consider an Echo.
>
> I think it's a big mistake for a relatively small company to try to
> market the first EVs as people-movers. That market is well served
> by
> other companies that have lots of experience and oceans of cash. A
> start up cannot compete. Not only on a business and production
> volume
> level, but on a technological level as well. People-movers are
> extremely challenging to design well and the established competition
> is
> very refined.
>
> If it was my company, the first vehicle offered would be a killer
> sports
> car. You need to make a splash, with a target market that will be
> passionate about the car. Performance sells. People pay big
> dollars
> for big high-g grins. They are more forgiving of little failings in
> creature comfort or features. People-mover buyers will literally
> chose
> another brand if they don't like how you've laid out the cup
> holders.
>
> Think about it. A 2500 lb. car with 288+ V, twin 8s and a Z2k would
> have the acceleration junkies lining up to buy. They would give
> your
> start up EV company lots of exposure, putting you on the map. Since
> that performance level puts you in the $40k and up price range, your
> profits should be adequate to develop more broad-market offerings
> for
> future release. Even if you stayed with low volume performance cars
> you
> could remain profitable. How many Vipers have been sold? You know
> they
> would disappear as soon as they failed to make a profit.
>
> This is the key. Get in the market first. Establish yourself,
> however
> small. Encourage any EV competitors, because confirming in the
> public's
> eye that EVs are real helps all the players. From there on, you
> help in
> changing how the public drives as quickly as your business acumen
> allows.
>
> I *know* this can be done. How to start?
>
> Chris
>
>
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Interesting, but... like the other AC drives around, it really needs to
be run at high voltages (336+ V) to be able to reach the 100 KW
potential given the current limits, which in turn retricts battery
choice and so on. If it could make 100 KW at 192 - 240 V range I'd be
more excited.
Assuming a high voltage system so have 100 KW going in, would need 100%
efficiency to make the claimed 135 HP. The given 0.975 x 0.92 = 89.7%
system efficiency would mean a peak of 120 HP.
And I know water cooling helps a lot but a 3" long motor and a 10 pound
controller seem really small for those power levels.
Guess I'm a skeptic this morning.
Sam Harper wrote:
Hey guys. I'm talking with a manufacturer now, because I want to resell
their AC drive systems. I'm not really doing this to sell product, but
I want to learn more about products, and I think this is a way to do
so. Would people be interested in a drive system with these specs:
Inverter
-100kw power rating
-Input from 12-400 VDC
-Peak current: 400 amps Nominal current: 300 amps
-Efficiency - 97.5%
-Liquid cooled
-Output - three-phase AC for flux vector or Volt/hz controlled induction
motors
-Features such as pot-box control, cruise control, regen braking,
vehicle reverse, and real-time diagnostics
-10lbs
Motor
-Peak power - 100kw/135HP, continuous power - 50kw/67HP
-Peak output : 300nm/220lbft, continuous output - 150nm/110lbft
-Base speed - 3000rpm
-Max speed - 6000rpm
-Efficiency - 92%
-3 in. long (4.75in long total), 11.2in diameter
-45lbs
-Water cooled
-Built-in encoders for inverter
-Sam Harper
Distortion Networks, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
678-758-4615
_________
Jim Coate
1992 Chevy S10
1970's Elec-Trak
http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Price ?
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 08:54:20 -0500 Jim Coate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Interesting, but... like the other AC drives around, it really needs
> to
> be run at high voltages (336+ V) to be able to reach the 100 KW
> potential given the current limits, which in turn retricts battery
> choice and so on. If it could make 100 KW at 192 - 240 V range I'd
> be
> more excited.
>
> Assuming a high voltage system so have 100 KW going in, would need
> 100%
> efficiency to make the claimed 135 HP. The given 0.975 x 0.92 =
> 89.7%
> system efficiency would mean a peak of 120 HP.
>
> And I know water cooling helps a lot but a 3" long motor and a 10
> pound
> controller seem really small for those power levels.
>
> Guess I'm a skeptic this morning.
>
> Sam Harper wrote:
> > Hey guys. I'm talking with a manufacturer now, because I want to
> resell
> > their AC drive systems. I'm not really doing this to sell
> product, but
> > I want to learn more about products, and I think this is a way to
> do
> > so. Would people be interested in a drive system with these
> specs:
> >
> > Inverter
> > -100kw power rating
> > -Input from 12-400 VDC
> > -Peak current: 400 amps Nominal current: 300 amps
> > -Efficiency - 97.5%
> > -Liquid cooled
> > -Output - three-phase AC for flux vector or Volt/hz controlled
> induction
> > motors
> > -Features such as pot-box control, cruise control, regen braking,
> > vehicle reverse, and real-time diagnostics
> > -10lbs
> >
> > Motor
> > -Peak power - 100kw/135HP, continuous power - 50kw/67HP
> > -Peak output : 300nm/220lbft, continuous output - 150nm/110lbft
> > -Base speed - 3000rpm
> > -Max speed - 6000rpm
> > -Efficiency - 92%
> > -3 in. long (4.75in long total), 11.2in diameter
> > -45lbs
> > -Water cooled
> > -Built-in encoders for inverter
> >
> > -Sam Harper
> > Distortion Networks, Inc.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 678-758-4615
>
>
>
>
> _________
> Jim Coate
> 1992 Chevy S10
> 1970's Elec-Trak
> http://www.eeevee.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seems Ireland isn't the emerald isle. England and Portugal are greener.
Lawrence Rhodes....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel J Rivest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 6:57 PM
Subject: sunset from space OT
> Totally OT but an incredible picture
> sunset from space http://www.jokesnstuff.net/surprise/sunsetspace.htm
>
> Daniel
> Beyond Oil
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Good idea but could jumpseats replace that coffin of a trunk. I have seen
children in the back of Porsches. Lawrence Rhodes......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 9:41 PM
Subject: Re: EV1s waiting,rant, an\' stuff
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Ok, so lets get together and write a business plan to get funding
> > and start this dream now.
>
> My vote would be to build a clone of the EV1. This way, anyone who
> "signs on" knows exactly what they will get. We would set out to
> duplicate it as closely as possible, just substituting parts that are
> more readily available for many of the original custom parts.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's too bad the CNG option isn't available on the Prius or Honda models.
It would give the CNG a good range and you could "Charge" at home if you
wanted. Lawrence Rhodes.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 10:32 PM
Subject: You Don't Have to Plug It In!
> I was a bit surprised by the howls of protests from this discussion
> group when the Insight and Prius were introduced with no way to
> charge them and when the makers touted that as a feature.
>
> If I had a Prius or Insight, I certainly wouldn't be complaining that
> I couldn't plug it in. On these cars, the electric drive system has so
> little energy storage capacity that very little gasoline could be saved
> by discharging the batteries and recharging them from an electric
> charger. Plugging in could be worthwhile if electricity provided
> a bigger fraction of the propulsion energy.
>
> I had an EV for 6 years and always considered charging and upkeep
> of batteries a flaming nuisance. It was worthwhile to escape the
> noise and pollution and upkeep of an infernal combustion engine,
> but a nuisance just the same.
>
> It's possible to have a hybrid that needs both battery charging and
> trips to a gas station. No thanks, I don't need that.
>
> Tom Shay
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> S1 & A1 are the positive and negative connections on the A89. S2 & A2 are
> connected. A 1204 is used. For a little turbo action I would use a relay
> so that when I am at full throttle it would activate the contactor and
shunt
> S1 & S2. I guess it would give me a kick in the pants.
> For the Golf cart it has a GE motor with two connections on one side of
the
> butt end(Negative and Reverse) and one on the other side(Positive from the
> contactor controller). On the other end on the same side as the two
> connections is another connection(Forward). There do not seem to be
> any markings on the terminals of the GE motor. I see no other terminals.
> What are the field connections. Thanks for the help Lee. Lawrence
> Rhodes.....
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 4:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Field terminals for field weakening.
>
>
> > Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> > > I must show my ignorance as to where the field terminals are on ADC
> > > and GE motors.
> >
> > The field terminals are marked S1 and S2, and located along the side of
> > the motor. The armature terminals are marked A1 and A2, and both located
> > at the end with the brushes.
> >
> > > If I do this trick with a 12 gauge wire could I use a golfcart
> > > contactor like the one I am using now?
> >
> > First, don't try this with a PWM controller! The voltage across the
> > field is not DC; it also has a peak-peak AC voltage nearly full pack
> > voltage! Since there is negligible inductance in that piece of 12-gauge
> > wire, the peak currents in it would be tremendous!
> >
> > So, the only way you can use field weakening with a PWM controller is if
> > you only allow the weakening resistor to be switched in when the
> > controller is FULL ON.
> >
> > But, you are right that a lower voltage contactor can be used to switch
> > the field weakening resistor in/out. As long as the controller isn't
> > switching, there is very little voltage across the field.
> > --
> > Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> > 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> > Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> > leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Um, I'm using 205/70R14 Michelin Energy MXV4 'GreenX' tires on my "light
truck" (S-10 conversion that weighs in at about 4200 pounds). The 95H
rating was actually one of the highest weight ratings for a 14" tire I
could find, LRR or not (1521 pounds @ 44psi). And yes, I believe these
were designed as LRR tires, although the web site is all changed around
and the new pages don't mention anything about it. Unfortunately my stop
& go city driving overshadows the LRR gains for most driving I do.
Seth wrote:
Based entirely on the mileage I lost when I changed to a different tire,
I would say Michelin Energy (green MXV?) is a LRR tire. But it is a
passenger car tire, not light truck, if that matters. It also had modest
adhesion. It was also very quiet and balanced well.
That is a non scientific data point.
A note is that for medium duty trucks with wheels down to ~16.5", you
can get LRR tires. Check out www.michelintruck.com. Many are for 19.5"
and larger wheels, but some are pickup sized. So it appears that they
have an interest in LRR tires. THe X One series are a novel approach,
irrelevant as they may be to a pickup truck. They were quoting as much
as a 30% reduction in rolling resistance for some tires, reulting in 10%
better fuel consumption, at the last SAE Truck and Bus show.
Seth
Wilmer Hechanova wrote:
Part 1.1Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
--
_________
Jim Coate
1992 Chevy S10
1970's Elec-Trak
http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
"give me a kick in the pants."
Actually by weakening the field you will have less available
torque but the motor will run at a higher speed (load depending).
When you weaken the field the motor will most likely run in
a more inefficient portion of the torque speed curve.
If you weaken the field too much you will draw excessive motor current and
will be very ineffiecient and can possibly damage the commutator from excessive
sparking (which will get worse with higher voltage, especially when using higher
voltage than the motor nameplate).
A series motor is really a comprimise to run well over a range of speeds for a given
vehicle. Field weakening will probably improve performance as long as you don't over
weaken. I would recommend getting some Ni-Chrome FW resistors from a forklift repair
shop.
I would not FW more than 30%.
A shunt motor definately has advantages (in my opinion) over the series motor
since it is much easier to weeken the field and you can easily regen.
I have 3 golf cart motors and one NEV motor in the basement, all of them
are GE. 3 of them have clear markings for S1, S2(F1 and F2 on the shunt motors)
, A1 & A2. One of the series motors had the nomenclature for the terminals
stamped on the endbell casting and it was difficult to read.
Does your motor have a nameplate? If so, what is the GE part number?
Rod
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
S1 & A1 are the positive and negative connections on the A89. S2 & A2 are
connected. A 1204 is used. For a little turbo action I would use a relay
so that when I am at full throttle it would activate the contactor and
shunt
S1 & S2. I guess it would give me a kick in the pants.
For the Golf cart it has a GE motor with two connections on one side of
the
butt end(Negative and Reverse) and one on the other side(Positive from the
contactor controller). On the other end on the same side as the two
connections is another connection(Forward). There do not seem to be
any markings on the terminals of the GE motor. I see no other terminals.
What are the field connections. Thanks for the help Lee. Lawrence
Rhodes.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: Field terminals for field weakening.
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
I must show my ignorance as to where the field terminals are on ADC
and GE motors.
The field terminals are marked S1 and S2, and located along the side of
the motor. The armature terminals are marked A1 and A2, and both located
at the end with the brushes.
If I do this trick with a 12 gauge wire could I use a golfcart
contactor like the one I am using now?
First, don't try this with a PWM controller! The voltage across the
field is not DC; it also has a peak-peak AC voltage nearly full pack
voltage! Since there is negligible inductance in that piece of 12-gauge
wire, the peak currents in it would be tremendous!
So, the only way you can use field weakening with a PWM controller is if
you only allow the weakening resistor to be switched in when the
controller is FULL ON.
But, you are right that a lower voltage contactor can be used to switch
the field weakening resistor in/out. As long as the controller isn't
switching, there is very little voltage across the field.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ben Graves wrote:
Has anyone out there successfully claimed the federal tax credit for an ice
to ev conversion. I have read IRS Publication 535 and Form 8834, but
neither seem to cover the tax credit for a conversion which is not being
used for business. From what I have read, I can claim a credit of 10% of
the cost of the ev (does this include the purchase price of the running ICE
donor?) to a maximum credit of $4,000. Any information would be
appreciated.
Its not for a conversion, its for a new EV.
IRS Pub 535, page 50,
"A vehicle is a qualified electric vehicle if it meets all the
following requirements.
1) It is a motor vehicle (defined earlier) powered primarily by an
electric motor drawing current from rechargeable batteries, fuel
cells, or other portable sources of electrical current.
2) You were the first person to use it.
3) You acquired it for your own use and not for resale.
4) It has never been used as a nonelectric vehicle.
5) It is not nonqualifying property, defined earlier."
Of particular note are numbers 2 and 4. I was wondering - if a new
vehicle was purchased, not registered at the time of purchase but
towed home, then converted, then registered, would the $4000 electric
vehicle credit apply? See, if it did apply I could see using a brand
new Kia Reo as a $4000 glider (approx. $8000 new cost minus the
credit).
Neon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
>
> This is sure the winner price wise, the only draw back I see is doing
> one battery at the time. If you have 10 of them, you have enough time.
> If you have 90 individual cells and recharging time (like in my case)
> is under 1 hour, it becomes problematic
I think we can deal with the time issue. First, if all you want to do is
monitor battery voltages, you can use reed relays. They pull in and drop
out in less than 1 msec; even if you had 100 batteries, you could check
all their voltages sequentially in 1 second. They also have life
expectancies of 100 million cycles or more; that's enough to sample
battery voltage once per second continuously for over 3 years.
If you want to charge or discharge through the relays, you need power
relays. They are about 10 times slower and rated 100,000 cycles at full
load, 1,000,000 cycles no-load. I used power relays, and switched them
so a scan takes 10 seconds to an hour. I don't try to do "instant"
monitoring with this system; it is just there to balance the batteries
over time.
It would be possible to have a second relay at each module to switch a
load resistor across the battery. Now your controller could load as many
batteries as desired simultaneously. But each module is still very
simple; nothing but 2 relays and a resistor.
> And, if one relay ever gets stuck, your system better detect it
> quick. I believe, this is what your balancer with BS2 brains does,
> is it?
Yes! My first prototype fried more than a few relays when things that
shouldn't have happened *did* happen. I've also see a Zivan Smoother
wrecked by the same problem. So my Balancer design took a belt *and*
suspenders *and* elastic *and* duct tape solution to make sure it could
never short batteries thru the relays.
- the Basic STAMP software is written not to pull in 2 relays at once
- the hardware is designed so only one relay output can be active
- the power source for the relay coils is current limited so it can't
pull in 2 coils at once
- there are at least 2 fuses in every path that current could flow in
if the above safeguards were somehow defeated.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seth wrote:
>
> I realize this wasn't a healthy battery to begin with, but the trend
> doesn't lend itself to believe that NiZn will have a much greater life
> than lead-acid.
>
> Seth
>
> Joe Smalley wrote:
> >
Until you realize that these are %100 DOD cycles, and Optimas are only
rated at 270 cycles to %80 DOD.
It certainly looks like we will get close to 500 cycles at %50 reduction
in capacity. This is pretty close to what they advertised.
Very little BS.
Most folks with AGMs had failures at 100-150 cycles. Those with real
chargers got 250+ Those with voltage controled Chargers and Regs are
still getting more.
Still 1/2 the weight
2x the cycle life
No thermal degradation down to 0 F.
These are what sells this battery. If we could get the price down from
400 bucks to 250 to 300, this chemistry would burry Lead acid.
It might anyways if they ever get here in volume.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sam Harper wrote:
> I completely agree, but I need to figure out some numbers first...
> I cant see anyone paying $26,500 for an electric sports car, and
> we'd need to sell 50.
Sam, the problem is that the customers for our EVs are not normal car
buyers, for whom price is the main factor. People who buy EVs have
already decided they want an EV; they find one with the features they
want, and pay whatever it takes to get it.
It's more like someone buying art. They want a particular painting, and
don't care what it costs. You can't distract them with something similar
that's cheaper. They want the real thing!
A possible loophole
There's been a lot of debate in the news about an accidental tax break
that allows people to buy very expensive SUVs and take huge deductions.
For example, if you are doctor and have incorporated yourself as a
business, your business (i.e. you) can buy a vehicle that weighs over
6000 lbs and costs up to $75,000, and deduct up to 2/3rds of its price
as a "business investment" and "accellerated depreciation". So the
doctor can buy a $70,000 Hummvee for $24,000 and justify it by saying "I
need it to get to the hospital in case of a snowstorm."
Perhaps the same loophole could be taken advantage of for EVs. You could
start a business "EV Testers" which buys an expensive EV that happens to
weigh 6000 lbs as a "research tool." It could all be set up to qualify
for those huge investment tax credits and depreciation allowances.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thomas Shay wrote:
> I was a bit surprised by the howls of protests from this discussion
> group when the Insight and Prius were introduced with no way to
> charge them and when the makers touted that as a feature.
We have a Prius. We live in Sartell MN, which is a small town. The
grocery store, bank, my son's school, and where I work are all less than
a mile away, and the speed limits to get there are 30 mph max. The
farthest that the car normally gets driven is to my wife's job, which is
about 5 miles away. The highest speed limit on that route is 40 mph.
The Prius has enough speed and battery power to cover all of these trips
on electric only. Since electric-only range is about 6-10 miles, my
wife's commute is the only one that would require that she plug in at
work or use the gasoline engine.
So, it would be a big feature to us if we could run it as a pure EV, and
charge at home in our garage. Instead of one trip to the gas station a
month, it might be zero!
> I had an EV for 6 years and always considered charging and upkeep
> of batteries a flaming nuisance.
Were these flooded batteries? Did you use a manual charger? How much
time did it take, and what did you do per day?
> It's possible to have a hybrid that needs both battery charging and
> trips to a gas station. No thanks, I don't need that.
The right way to look at it is that a hybrid needs to EITHER be plugged
in to charge, OR a trip to a gas station. The more you use one, the less
you use the other.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But if it does all that, is there no performance penalty? Remember, we are
starting with the assumption that this is supposed to be an "unlimited"
range vehicle.
I think if it is unlimited range that we are after we are going to need to
get Mr. Tilley involved ;-)
damon
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 22 Feb 2003 at 10:15, Rich Rudman wrote:
> It certainly looks like we will get close to 500 cycles at %50 reduction in
> capacity. This is pretty close to what they advertised.
The BCI standard for lead batteries, including Optimas, specifies end of
cycle life as 80% of specified capacity. Going to 50% capacity and calling
it a usable cycle life isn't really quite fair, IMO; and 500 cycles at 50%,
or even at 80%, is appreciably below what it should be for an alkaline
chemistry battery. That runs the cost per mile up. At $400 for a 12v
nominal module, or even at $200 each, I suspect that cost per lifetime mile
is still in the Optima range (read "high").
Of course if capacity degrades gradually instead of failing in some
catastrophic way that's a plus, but it's not exclusive. East Penn gel
batteries have a rep for doing that. I've heard that they often do 800+
cycles before reaching 50% of original capacity. (Unfortunately, East Penn
gels don't like high currents either.)
All that said, alkaline chemistry has some unquestionable advantages over
lead acid. Within that chemistry NiZn has some potential advantages over
NiCd in terms of cost, supply, and toxicity. So I'd certainly like to see
someone successfully commercialize EV-sized NiZn batteries, and make them
reliable and long-lasting.
I give Evercell credit for trying, but I don't know whether they'll be that
someone. I'm a little skeptical, for a couple of reasons. One is that I'm
not sure about Evercell's financial durability. Unless we have some
insiders here, I don't think we have any way of gauging their condition, and
can't predict whether Evercell will still be around in 5 or 10 years.
The other unknown is quality. I've become convinced that the key to making
batteries of ^any^ chemistry that work reliably and last is close (and
expensive) attention to high quality and consistency. That's why the
Panasonic lead batteries used in EV1s at the end worked well, and the reason
that Saft nicads stand up for so many years. Whether Evercell and their
Chinese producer can match that quality and consistency remains to be seen.
Waiting to be shown ...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation, or
switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
1991 Solectria Force 144vac
1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send this to all
thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I smite thee.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Paul G wrote:
IRS Pub 535, page 50,
"A vehicle is a qualified electric vehicle if it meets all the
following requirements.
1) It is a motor vehicle (defined earlier) powered primarily by an
electric motor drawing current from rechargeable batteries, fuel
cells, or other portable sources of electrical current.
2) You were the first person to use it.
3) You acquired it for your own use and not for resale.
4) It has never been used as a nonelectric vehicle.
5) It is not nonqualifying property, defined earlier."
Of particular note are numbers 2 and 4. I was wondering - if a new
vehicle was purchased, not registered at the time of purchase but
towed home, then converted, then registered, would the $4000
electric vehicle credit apply?
In theory, yes. In practice, this will be very hard to do. First,
there is the simple hassle of not registering the vehicle at the time
of purchase. But more importantly, there is the question of how it
looks to the tax man. You will have major problems of proof on
clause four, which gives the tax-payer the unenviable burden of
proving a negative. If the vehicle was designed and built as a
standard-fuel vehicle, you will have one heck of a time proving that
you never actually ran it that way. Short of getting some written
agreement from the dealer to remove the engine for you before you
accepted delivery, I'm not really sure how you'd go about proving
your non-use. While such a scheme may be technically valid, you
might as well just write, "Please audit me" on your tax return.
-Adam Kuehn
--- End Message ---
