EV Digest 7026
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Another, fairer comparison
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Another, fairer comparison
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Another, fairer comparison
by John Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) The final comparison
by "Richard Acuti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Energy unit conversion and comparison - units
by Jim Bundscho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) RE: Wayland Invitational Videos and News on the NEDRA site
by Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Piedmont Carolina EVA - First Meeting in Charlotte!
by Peter Eckhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Another, fairer comparison
by "Jay Caplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Best Charger?
by "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Electric Evette
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) EV's need sleep mode
by "John Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
by "patrick DonEgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) dc:dc converter
by Bob Siebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Fueling EV's, Re: Another, fairer comparison
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
by "Bob Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Belt drives, Re: Tropica Reducer
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: dc/dc converter
by Bill & Nancy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: 80 % discharge voltage
by "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
by "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
On 14 Jul 2007 at 13:13, GWMobile wrote:
> Co2 and globalwarming is not the number one reason to encourage EV use.
There are many reasons, and no matter which one you cite you're apt to annoy
some EVDL member who doesn't agree with it. Our members come from all over
the political and attitude spectrum. We have peak-oilers and climate-change
skeptics. We have people who march against nuclear power and people who
work in the nuclear power industry. And lo and behold, they help each other
build EVs!
The one thing we all agree on (I hope!) is that EVs are a pretty good idea.
How we arrive at that point isn't very important, and I don't think we
should waste bandwidth arguing about whether any particular reason is valid
or not. Let's concentrate on building EVs, and getting them on the market
for folks who don't want to (or can't) build them.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Good point.
In addition to the well to wheel comparisons "Debunking the Myth of
EVs and Smokestacks" dives right into the issue of pollution in the
opening section. As a matter of fact CO2 it's listed last with more
discussion on hydrocarbons, NO2 and SO2.
http://www.evadc.org/pwrplnt.pdf
Chip Gribben
On Jul 14, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: GWMobile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: July 14, 2007 4:13:26 PM EDT
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Another, fairer comparison
Co2 and globalwarming is not the number one reason to encourage EV
use.
Polllution is.
Pollution kills people everyday and raises healthcare costs
enormously.
Global warming and co2 may kill us in 20 50 or 200 years but
pollution is scarring your lungs RIGHT THIS SECOND.
Frankly I wish people would spend more time talking about pollution
than co2.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Timothy Balcer wrote:
John,
Their numbers are using nationwide averages, ....
yup, its a nationwide average as noted.
None of that matters. Right now, this second, the grid can support 20
million electric cars, assuming they do most of their charging at
night. ....
not in California we can't. According to a Scientific American article a
while back, large parts of the nation are very close to maxing out the
grid. And nighttime usage is increasing rapidly. Anyway there seems to
be a consensus that a lot more grid-infrastructure is needed. But there
aren't any significant numbers of EVs yet either, so proponents need to
advocate for more capacity as well as more EV cars to drive. We hope
conservation will provide a substantial portion of the capacity too.
By the time we get 20 million electric cars out there, I'd say we
could probably have most of those old coal plants cleaned up. So
honestly, why even talk about this? ...
One I found it interesting, and two, I think proponents should make
careful statements about alternate fuel vehicles backed up by science.
I can't buy/afford a BEV or a high-mileage bio-diesel off the lot yet,
so its a bit academic, I admit. For the record I am not yet convinced
that there is any honest measure of so-called carbon-neutrality for
bio-fuels, so they are less attractive, to me personally, than the GREET
report would advise.
That's the real deal. Thats the big-ness right there! This 'well to
wheels' thing is a red herring and not worth the effort. ...
Ridiculous!
obviously I, and the scientists, disagree ;>) .
JF
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I never intended to spark such a debate when I tried to figure out a
universal way to compare vehicle efficiency. :) I was just trying to make
an honest comparison between 2 types of drivetrains to see if an electric
drive was really efficient by an order of magnitude large enough to justify
pursuing it any further.
I'm glad to say that it obviously is, and I thank the heavy brains on the
list for helping fix my math. In the end, I feel that when you take it as
far as a well-to-wheels comparison, EV's are still more efficient enough to
justify all the work I've done and will do. One thing no one really brought
up is the fact that we are comparing EV's with ICE cars that are assumed to
be either brand-new or in perfect tune. We all know that as ICE's age, they
get worse and in the D.C./Baltimore metroplex, I am here to tell you that
almost NO ONE maintains their cars in that condition. We have a lot of
um..."lower income bracket" people here that drive total jalopies. How they
are passing safety and emissions tests I'll never know when I'm gagging on
their exhaust as I drive.
EV's themselves (not counting the power plant) are 100% clean from the
cradle to the grave. There will never be an oil leak, a fuel leak, or an
antifreeze drip from them. I'm not sure what the environmental impact of an
acid spill would be in the instance of a serious accident where battery
cases are ruptured but I suspect it's a lot less. That's one of the things I
like about EV's.
Electricity truly is the "universal currency" of energy. I know it's sad to
say, but my faith in my country and in my fellow man is at an all-time low
(especially captains of industry and utilities). I really can't wait to set
up some sort of wind or solar power generation at home and become further
independent.
_________________________________________________________________
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There is an excellent article about energy conversion
using joules as the basic unit for measure. It is
well footnoted with resources and support documents.
http://www.teslamotors.com/display_data/twentyfirstcenturycar.pdf
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I may be missing a previous post, and thus not
following, but in general, all posts have lead
terminals.
(To combine two metals like copper and lead invites
some electrochemistry that makes batteries work in the
first place, depending on the type of metals).
Lead is convenient b/c when we have a melted post
for some reason, or if we've ordered the wrong
terminal, it's fairly easy to remove and replace,
though in fairness, that process is for all means and
purposes, _soldering_.
Very few of us that I know of solder terminals on.
That makes battery swap-outs more difficult, as well
as the fact that soldered terminals are more brittle.
If these are smaller, "exotic type" batteries,
feel free to disregard...
Sincerely,
--- Mark Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was a bit surprised when I ordered some 4/0
> battery terminals thinking
> they would be all copper with plating. They arrived
> today (24 of them) and
> to my surprise the heads themselves are made of
> lead.
>
> I see this as a problem since they cannot be
> soldered on and if they are
> overcrimped it might crush the connector part made
> of plated copper away
> causing a bad connection later. I also see some
> potential for the torque
> backing off over time.
>
> So I need advice. Should I send these back? If so
> what should I get
> instead?
>
> I don't want to waste expensive cable if these are
> not going to work so if
> anyone is using them let me know.
>
> Mark Ward
> 95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
> www.saabrina.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
Converting a gen. 5 Honda Civic? My $20 video/DVD
has my '92 sedan, as well as a del Sol and hatch too!
Learn more at:
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search
that gives answers, not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What really happened on Friday in Portland...
http://frozenfowlers.blogspot.com/2007/07/summer-holiday-quickshot-portland.html
Mark
(Sorry to pretty much everyone involved :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Chip Gribben
Sent: Sun 7/15/2007 2:15 AM
To: EV Discussion List
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Wayland Invitational Videos and News on the NEDRA site
Hey all,
Roderick, Mike and Jack have been reporting back some great stuff.
Jack has some great YouTube video which I put up on the NEDRA site.
The first one is the Zombie wasting a Stang and the Killacycle doing
a warm-up run at 135 mph.
More to come
http://www.nedra.com
Chip
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I wanted to pass this on to the list especially for those in the Carolinas:
Piedmont Carolina Electric Vehicle Association (PCEVA) has been been
chartered! A new chapter of the Electric Automobile Association
(eaaev.org <http://eaaev.org>) here in the Charlotte Area.
The Vice Presidents Mike and Paula Moore are putting together a website
for us at: opecthis.info <http://opecthis.info>
OUR FIRST MEETING!!!
.. Will be 10am Saturday, July 28th
Location: Charlotte Energy Solutions
337 Baldwin Avenue
Charlotte, NC 28204
Directions:
With easy access from I-77 and also from I-85, Mark Englander (store
owner) would be the best source or directions if you don't have access
to Mapquest or don't trust it. His number is 704-333-4358 at the store
and cell phone 704-307-8262.
At this first meeting we will be watching "Who Killed the Electric
Car?". Mark is supplying fresh popped popcorn and I'll bring some
sodas.
I'm sure Mike and Paula will bring their electric Chevy S-10 pickup
truck with new Lithium batteries they are testing. They are the most
active EV'ers in our area!
We'll begin meeting each other and brainstorming what we'd like to do
with this club. I look forward to seeing and meeting many of you,
we'll have a good time.
Forward this email to anyone that might be interested and if this was
forwarded to you make sure you get on my mailing list for future emails
and updates.
Warmest regards,
Todd W. Garner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
704-849-9648
704-819-4860 cell
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I agree.
Remember from grade school, CO2 is a limiting factor in plant growth. More
CO2 means more food and fiber produced, will support a larger population on
the planet, less famine and death. Tree rings have been shown to be wider in
the last few decades due to more CO2 in the atmosphere.
As far as global warming, just look up. It's the Sun, duh. Gets hotter and
cooler, more cosmic rays and then less cosmic rays. There is a long sunspot
cycle that controls this. It was warmer than it is now in year 1100 with no
fossil fuels burned then. Called the Medieval Warm Period. Temps were
ccoling from 1940-1980 and there was a lot of fossil fuel burned then. For
that matter, the ice caps on Mars are smaller on average now - it's the Sun.
Don't let EVs be dissed because of CO2. They are the cleanest ride, and (if
and) when electricity is all made with nuclear power, they will have a
virtually all clean pedigree.
----- Original Message -----
From: "GWMobile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: Another, fairer comparison
> Co2 and globalwarming is not the number one reason to encourage EV use.
>
> Polllution is.
> Pollution kills people everyday and raises healthcare costs enormously.
> Global warming and co2 may kill us in 20 50 or 200 years but pollution
> is scarring your lungs RIGHT THIS SECOND.
>
> Frankly I wish people would spend more time talking about pollution than
> co2.
>
>
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 10:00 am, Cor van de Water wrote:
> > Zeke,
> >> An electric car is no cleaner from a CO2 standpoint...
> > That would surprise me.
> > I would expect that in total pollution, power plants are allowed
> > a lot more exhaust than a (modern!) car can emit, but when you
> > talk about CO2, then you are simply talking about total fuel
> > consumption.
> > Since electric vehicles are so efficient, their main loss is
> > the efficiency of the power plant. Modern plants can achieve
> > about 50%, but you mention dirty (old?) coal power, so the
> > efficiency of those could need some improvement, to say it politely.
> >
> > Anyhow, the ICE is so horrendously inefficient that it is hard
> > to start listing what it is that can be improved, Hybrid
> > vehicles had attached the most obvious issues and indeed, a
> > very efficient Hybrid can take on many EVs in terms of the
> > total energy usage, but that is not an apples to apples
> > comparison, because how can you compare a Prius to a S10 EV?
> >
> > The calculations I have seen have always shown EVs much more
> > efficient in "well to wheels" comparisons, but you may live
> > in an area that is very backward in terms of generation of
> > electricity, or maybe your data is flawed - hard to tell
> > without all the details and I am not a specialist myself,
> > but I do know about EV efficiency and tricks that are
> > being played to make them appear to be less than the relief
> > that they actually bring.
> > One example is to compare the EPA Highway MPG of the ICE with the
> > actual consumption of the EV....
> >
> > As always, YMMV.
> >
> > Cor van de Water
> > Systems Architect
> > Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
> > Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
> > Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
> > Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Zeke Yewdall
> > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 8:30 AM
> > To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> > Subject: Re: Another, fairer comparison
> >
> > I recently ran the numbers for an electric car here in Colorado (dirty
> > coal plants!). An electric car is no cleaner from a CO2 standpoint
> > than the same car on gasoline. BUT, like John says, use solar or
> > wind. We
> > have program where for an extra 2.5cents a kWh you can buy windpower
> > from
> > the big windfarms in CO an WY. Or, I have a solar array on my house
> > (60%
> > paid for by the utility company -- they love coal, but we had a
> > statewide
> > public referendum, and they were forced to offer rebates for solar),
> > and
> > right now it's producing about 3
> > times as much as my house needs. AND, I can recharge and EV from my
> > house instead of having to go to Venezuala or Iraq or Nigeria or
> > wherever,
> > to get fuel for it. Heck of a lot more convenient eh?
> >
> > Z
> >
> > On 7/14/07, Timothy Balcer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> John,
> >>
> >> Their numbers are using nationwide averages, which use the nastiest
> >> dirtiest coal plants as part of the equation. Of -course- the very
> >> latest technology lean diesel engines using biodiesel itself a fuel
> >> low in pollutants) will win out. It's a matter of stacking the deck,
> >> because as long as there is a fuel, the oil companies will have the
> >> hammerlock.
> >>
> >> None of that matters. Right now, this second, the grid can support 20
> >> million electric cars, assuming they do most of their charging at
> >> night. Today. That is the amount of power electric companies are
> >> wasting at night due to wasted capacity. What that means is that for
> >> the first 20 million electric cars put out there, we are lowering
> >> pollution no matter HOW the electricity is being produced.
> >>
> >> By the time we get 20 million electric cars out there, I'd say we
> >> could probably have most of those old coal plants cleaned up. So
> >> honestly, why even talk about this? It's an argument used by the
> >> petrol folks. I don't care how efficient an electric car is compared
> >> to petrol, honestly. I mean its NICE that they are so efficient, but
> >> the big thing about EVs is not that they are so efficient (although
> >> that is a positive aspect). The big thing about it is that you can
> >> power them on THE SUN. You don't need -any- liquid fuels whatsoever.
> >> You can use wind, solar, hydro.. any sort of natural motive power
> >> instead of having to -burn- anything. And since you won't -have- to,
> >> then people will suddenly not want to.
> >>
> >> That's the real deal. Thats the big-ness right there! This 'well to
> >> wheels' thing is a red herring and not worth the effort. It's like
> >> comparing dynamite fishing to fly fishing by talking about how many
> >> fish you get per joule of energy in a stick of dynamite vs. how much
> >> heat energy per person is spent fishing for the trout in cold water.
> >> Ridiculous!
> >>
> >> --T
> >>
> >> PS: For the record, Nukes are bad from an economic point of view. You
> >> shouldn't want nukes, mainly because they are so expensive to produce
> >> and maintain, and so dangerous, that the government has to underwrite
> >> construction, AND had to pass a bill exempting nuclear power plants
> >> from liability in the event of a disaster. Honestly, I'd much rather
> >> build craploads of wind farms and solar plants. They are the cheapest,
> >> long term. No liability issues, no cleanup issues, easy to operate and
> >> maintain.
> >>
> >> On 7/12/07, john fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > There is an official government sponsored program at Argonne Labs
> >> > called GREET to measure exactly what you are all talking about. I
> >> have
> > started writing a piece about it, but the details are very complex, and
> > its
> > taking a long time.
> >> > just google GREET argonne should bring it up...
> >> >
> >> > anyway the conclusion was highly optimized bio-diesel hybrid IIRC
> >> > correctly was less polluting than a pure EV using coal-fired
> >> > electricity. Natural-gas->H2 fuel cell was too of course. Many other
> >> > technologies/fuels were in the same ballpark. I can't tell yet what
> > parameters they used for each fuel ( and there are many) but it is
> > truly a
> > well to wheels attempt at figuring out the cost.
> >> >
> >> > Before you all blow a gasket, the reason the bio-diesel does better
> >> > than EVs is that diesel and especially some kinds of bio-diesel,
> >> > take a lot less energy and less pollution than coal-fired power.
> >> > Obviously if you use hydro or solar/wind or natural gas to make
> > electricity you'll get a different result. The study uses nationwide
> > averages, rather than state-by-state numbers AFAIK.
> >> >
> >> > caveat- haven't crunched all the numbers yet, so read it yourself.
> >> >
> >> > Lesson I take from it?
> >> > You are only as clean as your electrons.
> >> > gotta get existing coal plants cleaned up right away and focus on
> >> > all new plants to minimize pollution. Nukes will help but are many
> >> years
> > out. I believe this could be seen as a political statement too.
> >> >
> >> > John
> >> >
> >> > GWMobile wrote:
> >> > > The comparision has been done it the amount of pollutants released
> >> > > for electric car power production is miniscule compared to
> >> automotive
> > gas use.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
> >> better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in
> >> peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the
> >> hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may
> >> posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
> >>
> >> -----Samuel Adams
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Zeke Yewdall
> > Chief Electrical Engineer
> > Sunflower Solar, A NewPoint Energy Company
> > Cell: 720.352.2508
> > Office: 303.459.0177
> > FAX documents to: 720.269.1240
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > www.cosunflower.com
> >
> > CoSEIA Certified
> > Certified BP Solar Installer
> > National Association of Home Builders
> >
> > Quotable Quote
> >
> > "In the dark of the moon, in flying snow, in the dead of winter, war
> > spreading, families dying, the world in danger, I walk the rocky
> > hillside
> > sowing clover."
> >
> > Wendell Berry
>
> www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes, globalwarming
> and the melting poles.
>
> www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake images.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You mention that Zivan chargers aren't that good. Well, the 120
(input) volt version would be gentler; does that mean the 120 volt
version would be better, or good?
14/07, David Roden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 13 Jul 2007 at 22:09, Joseph T. wrote:
> What, in your opinion, is the best charger for an EV using AGMs?
>
> Flooded?
This is a very difficult question to answer because you've provided very
little additional information. I don't know what voltage you're using, or
how large a battery, or how much you want to spend.
However, I'd say that one of the smartest and most flexible readily
available chargers for >any< battery from 130 volts up is the Swiss-made
Brusa NLG5 range. Metricmind.com offers them in the US. They are available
in several different voltage ranges, output power ranges, and cooling
configurations.
Warning - they are not cheap! But they will "baby" your battery so that it
lasts longer; in the long run they will save you money.
For batteries to 72 volts, you might want to look at the Chinese-made
(Canadian-designed) Delta-Q chargers. They're also microprocessor
controlled, but aren't as flexible as the Brusa chargers (they're set at the
factory for your battery, and have to be reprogrammed for each change you
make).
For voltages between these ranges, Russco chargers can be a good choice.
They batteries are not fully isolated from the power line, but they do have
build in GFIs, which provide some measure of shock protection. They are not
as "smart" as either of the above chargers, either, though I think
additional charge control is an option.
Zivan chargers (from Italy, last I saw) offer full isolation for safety.
They're microprocessor controlled, but have a reputation of being rough on
batteries. They also have to be returned to a dealer if you want to change
your battery configuration. Some folks have had good results from these,
but I'm a bit hesitant to recommend them. A friend of mine scrapped with
the Zivan distributor for years, trying to get his charger set for less
aggressive equalization because he believed that the charger was
overcharging his battery. He never achieved his goal. Finally he gave up.
Other chargers to consider are the PFC range from Manzanita. These chargers
are popular with EV hobbyists because they provide high output power at a
relatively low price, at the expense of having fairly rudimentary charge
control. Support for these chargers is reportedly excellent, as the
designer and manufacturer are right here on the EVDL! On the downside,
they're not isolated from the power line, and don't have built-in GFIs, so
they must be provided with an external GFI for safety. AFAIK, they're not
UL approved. Adding battery regulators to them provides more charge control
(they're designed to use Manzanita's own regulators), but they still don't
achieve the "smartness" level of the Brusa or Delta-Q microprocessor
controlled chargers.
Hope this helps.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Exactly. Like Mike, I find that on this list, we all
have different requirements. My EV requirements
included airbags; room for electric guitar &
amplifier; room for entire family; thus my Civic. I'm
hooked on that model of glider, but I'm still
impressed by the people on the list who built for
racing, and those that converted trucks, knowing they
would likely only be moving their own tush, and
perhaps a load of landscaping stuff...
--- Mike Chancey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom,
>
> I think you are missing several key points. Your
> position seems to
> be that your creation is so superior in every way to
> an EV conversion
> that to build anything else would be a waste of
> time. Holding ones
> work in high regard is reasonable, but to treat all
> others with
> disdain is not a way to win friends and influence
> people. It is
> quite probably that most conversions would have
> difficulty matching
> you projected battery percentage. I am sure however
> that this
> advantage has nothing to do with your two/three
> wheel configuration
> and everything to do with the fact you were able to
> start from
> scratch so to speak. I am quite confidant that your
> numbers could
> not only be matched but far exceeded while still
> maintaining a four
> wheel layout. Most of us are interested in owning
> and driving an
> electric car. Honestly, the Evette is kind of cool,
> but I can't
> imaging driving it year-round in real traffic and
> real weather. I
> can't tell from the pictures, but does it even have
> side windows? I
> mean, if we are going to throw all the creature
> comforts out in the
> name of max range, haven't we missed the point of
> traveling?
>
> Have you actually driven the Evete with 1600 pounds
> of batteries in it?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Mike Chancey,
> '88 Civic EV
> Kansas City, Missouri
> EV Photo Album at: http://evalbum.com
> My Electric Car at:
> http://www.geocities.com/electric_honda
> Mid-America EAA chapter at: http://maeaa.org
> Join the EV List at:
> http://www.madkatz.com/ev/evlist.html
>
> In medio stat virtus - Virtue is in the moderate,
> not the extreme
> position. (Horace)
>
>
Converting a gen. 5 Honda Civic? My $20 video/DVD
has my '92 sedan, as well as a del Sol and hatch too!
Learn more at:
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Production EV's may have a many $k pack. They shouldn't be dumb enough to
kill it if parked with lights on, leaky vacum pump etc.
What conditions should put them to sleep? How should they be awakened?
Anyone know if Tesla or Tango or others go into sleep mode? Is anyone out
there making a BMS and not planning to have a sleep mode (for the batteries,
not the BMS!)
- John
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Do you have a part number or picture we can look @?
On 7/14/07, Mark Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was a bit surprised when I ordered some 4/0 battery terminals thinking
they would be all copper with plating. They arrived today (24 of them) and
to my surprise the heads themselves are made of lead.
I see this as a problem since they cannot be soldered on and if they are
overcrimped it might crush the connector part made of plated copper away
causing a bad connection later. I also see some potential for the torque
backing off over time.
So I need advice. Should I send these back? If so what should I get
instead?
I don't want to waste expensive cable if these are not going to work so if
anyone is using them let me know.
Mark Ward
95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
www.saabrina.blogspot.com
--
Patrick Ira Donegan
TigerBody Electric Vehicles
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does anyone know where I can find a dc:dc converter with
approximately the following specs:
Input: 4 amps at 48 VDC nominal (range 48 - 84 Volts; under full load
the source will range from 48 to 58 volts)
Output: 1 amp at 240 VDC.
Because to the highly variable input a maximum power point tracking
(MPPT) is desirable.
Thanks.
/Bob S.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi John, Tim and All,
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: John Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Another, fairer comparison
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:37:22 -0700
>Timothy Balcer wrote:
>> John,
>>
>> Their numbers are using nationwide averages, ....
>yup, its a nationwide average as noted.
>>
>>
>> None of that matters. Right now, this second, the grid
>> can support 20 million electric cars, assuming they do
>> most of their charging at night. ....
>not in California we can't.
That's just not true. While Cal has some problems
including utilities with holding power, which are now mostly
fixed.
Notice what Tim said, if done off peak like nightime,
even badly stretched girds can handle a lot of EV's. Why is
the peak where grids have trouble is many times 3-4x's the
low usuage rate.
And if becomes a real problem later as we get over
20,000,000 EV's is the EV itself can be used to prop up the
grid during peak loads by using the EV battery packs to
supply them, them recharging them when the peak has past.
This is so valueable that utilities might charge them for
free! Peak power can cost them $.50kwhr!!
According to a Scientific
>American article a while back, large parts of the nation
>are very close to maxing out the grid. And nighttime usage
>is increasing rapidly. Anyway there seems to be a
>consensus that a lot more grid-infrastructure is needed.
Maybe by those who don't know better. The future will
be in distributed generation, much of it RE. Not only that
but RE will eat into the coal market as the true cost of
coal is put in the electric bill. The fact is coal when all
costs are included is not cheap!! In 5 yrs I'd bet you will
find wind, solar thermal, non dam tidal/river gens,
home/business cogen, biomass, ect will be cheaper than coal
or oil. And many homes will make more power than they use!!
Many who signed up early for wind power in Cal now
have the lowest electric costs!!
For a cost scale coal is about .03kwhr but rising
rapidly where wind is about .04kwhr, NG about .05kwhr
rising, nuke .04kwhr and dropping, biomas .05kwhr, non dam
hydro river/tidal will be about .01-.02kwhr so you can see,
RE isn't that costly.
Personally I can build a windgen capable of running
my home and EV even in a low wind state like Fla for well
under $500 so I'll never be without cheap power. You can too
if you want and why future energy prices will be naturally
capped buy low cost RE.
Another is the push for conservation which is the
most cost effective energy source!! If everyone switched to
screw in floursent lights would alievate the need for most
of the future coal plants.
To underscore this our Rep. Fla Gov just cut 5 new
coal plants from being built and starting a real energy
program that will reduce our electric needs thru
conservation, RE. You know when Repblican Govs start doing
this it's going to happen!!
So the fact is we problably will never need as much
energy as we do now even with Fla's growth.
Now add to the fact many new EV's will be in the
30-50 wthr/mile under 35 mph class and even freeway EV's, 2
seaters will get under 100wthrs/mile with 4 seaters under
150wthr/mile, so they really don't need much electricity,
adding to the numbers of EV's a grid could handle.
Most of the mostly outdated comparisons had EV use in
the 300wthr/mile range so it needs to be adjusted to lower
EV energy useage like 150wthr/mile and the fact most coal
plants are far cleaner now in the last 10 yrs. 2 of the 10
dirtiest were close to me are now many times cleaner and one
switched to cogen NG.
My main reasons for EV's are lower costs and I can
produce the fuel myself if nessasary, lower pollution,
freedom from big auto, oil, supporting dictators and
terrorists, thus increasing national, economic and personal
security.
So basicly we are well set up for the future of EV's
and the electricity to fuel them. If industry, gov, doesn't
come through, we can do it ourselves!!
Jerry Dycus
>But there aren't any significant numbers of EVs yet either
>, so proponents need to advocate for more capacity as well
>as more EV cars to drive. We hope conservation will
>> provide a substantial portion of the capacity too. By the
>> time we get 20 million electric cars out there, I'd say
>we could probably have most of those old coal plants
>> cleaned up. So honestly, why even talk about this? ...
>One I found it interesting, and two, I think proponents
>should make careful statements about alternate fuel
>vehicles backed up by science. I can't buy/afford a BEV
>or a high-mileage bio-diesel off the lot yet, so its a bit
>academic, I admit. For the record I am not yet convinced
>that there is any honest measure of so-called
>carbon-neutrality for bio-fuels, so they are less
>attractive, to me personally, than the GREET report would
>>advise.
>>
>> That's the real deal. Thats the big-ness right there!
>> This 'well to wheels' thing is a red herring and not
>> worth the effort. ... Ridiculous!
>obviously I, and the scientists, disagree ;>) .
>
>JF
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Patrick, Send 'em back, if you can. Your first impression was right,
tinned copper is the norm. If you have an impact crimper (hammer- type) it
works well and it's cheap. I use welding cable (more flexible) and after
crimping use shrink tubing with hot-melt lining to seal the deal (and it
comes in black and red), I've found everything thru the McMaster Carr
catalog, check it out. Later, Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "patrick DonEgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 6:26 PM
Subject: Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
Do you have a part number or picture we can look @?
On 7/14/07, Mark Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was a bit surprised when I ordered some 4/0 battery terminals thinking
they would be all copper with plating. They arrived today (24 of them)
and
to my surprise the heads themselves are made of lead.
I see this as a problem since they cannot be soldered on and if they are
overcrimped it might crush the connector part made of plated copper away
causing a bad connection later. I also see some potential for the torque
backing off over time.
So I need advice. Should I send these back? If so what should I get
instead?
I don't want to waste expensive cable if these are not going to work so
if
anyone is using them let me know.
Mark Ward
95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
www.saabrina.blogspot.com
--
Patrick Ira Donegan
TigerBody Electric Vehicles
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Bill and All,
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Bill Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Tropica Reducer
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:01:16 -0600
>In the Tropica, there's a piece that fits over the motor
>shaft which accepts the toothed belt. I'd like to reduce
>the gear ratio of the Tropica from 5:2:1 to something
>closer to 4:1. Are those toothed gear acceptors something
>that you can buy in various sizes, or would they have to
>be custom-made?
When the Tropica was made there was only 1 belt that
would work and it was Gates Polychain. You can find stock
sprockets at any Motion Industries, other 'bearing' stores,
NAPA which is another branch of Motion Ind.
Normally they are kept to 36mm wide or they make too
much noise. By going to a larger sprocket you will increase
belt life, increase eff. With a 5.2-1 ratio, you probably
use the 22 tooth sprocket which is too small for belt life.
Is your rear sprocket bigger than it's rim? At that ratio
it's going to be hard not too and not a good idea. And
probably why they needed a reducer. Sadly they could have
had the motors wound for lower rpm, more torque so their
rpm-ratio needed wouldn't be so high.
You will have to get a belt the right, new length to
keep the shaft inline with the rear suspension pivot.
Last yr Gates patents ran out so Brown, others make
them now and their price is dropping because of it.
One last thing is if you just want higher speed, you
can use field weakening on the motors instead of changing
ratio's and still keep lower current, faster acceleration of
the higher ratio.
BTW an aero top could greatly increase your high
speed range and possibly faster too, hinged for getting
in/out.
Jerry Dycus
>
>Thanks.
>
>Bill Dennis
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You might check with astrodyne? http://www.bradleygt.com/
They have a good selection at a reasonable cost.
Bill
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
"Really, IMO the practical limit for any golf car battery, gel or flooded, is
about 500-600 amps"
I've always heard the same thing about flooded batteries, but never
with gel batteries. Gel batteries, from what I have heard, are not
suitable for DC systems since they cannot provide high current.
On 7/14/07, David Roden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 14 Jul 2007 at 0:00, Jerry Wagner wrote:
> I get readings much lower during
> acceleration, down in the low 120's. Is this normal?
The chart you quoted appears to be open-circuit voltage for flooded lead
batteries at various states of charge, which isn't very useful for answering
your question.
I don't have numbers for different SOC, but the rule of thumb is that a lead
battery that falls to 1.75 volts per cell under load is effectively flat >at
that load<. For a 144 volt battery, that would be 126 volts. If you're
seeing voltages in the lower 120s on a 144v pack, either the pack is flat or
you're simply drawing too much current.
I'm not familiar with the Deka GC-15 batteries. Are they gel batteries?
Deka Dominator gel should be held to 3C max. For the 8GGC2 golf car
batteries (the model number I'm familiar with), that would be 540 amps.
Really, IMO the practical limit for any golf car battery, gel or flooded, is
about 500-600 amps. If you need or want more power than your voltage can
deliver at that current, you should probably go to AGMs.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
"I may be missing a previous post, and thus not
following, but in general, all posts have lead
terminals."
Isn't lead a little too soft to have all that pressure on it,
squeezing it to death!
By the way, how many ft-lbs of force are usually used to secure cable
lugs to their battery terminals?
On 7/14/07, Bob Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Patrick, Send 'em back, if you can. Your first impression was right,
tinned copper is the norm. If you have an impact crimper (hammer- type) it
works well and it's cheap. I use welding cable (more flexible) and after
crimping use shrink tubing with hot-melt lining to seal the deal (and it
comes in black and red), I've found everything thru the McMaster Carr
catalog, check it out. Later, Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "patrick DonEgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 6:26 PM
Subject: Re: Battery Terminals need advice!
> Do you have a part number or picture we can look @?
>
>
>
> On 7/14/07, Mark Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I was a bit surprised when I ordered some 4/0 battery terminals thinking
>> they would be all copper with plating. They arrived today (24 of them)
>> and
>> to my surprise the heads themselves are made of lead.
>>
>> I see this as a problem since they cannot be soldered on and if they are
>> overcrimped it might crush the connector part made of plated copper away
>> causing a bad connection later. I also see some potential for the torque
>> backing off over time.
>>
>> So I need advice. Should I send these back? If so what should I get
>> instead?
>>
>> I don't want to waste expensive cable if these are not going to work so
>> if
>> anyone is using them let me know.
>>
>> Mark Ward
>> 95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
>> www.saabrina.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Ira Donegan
> TigerBody Electric Vehicles
>
--- End Message ---
