January 27th meeting - not the 13th.
That was the date I recalled from the LA Times article about a week ago.
Jim Walls
-Original Message-
From: "Lawrence Rhodes via EV"
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 22:00
To: "ev@lists.evdl.org"
Cc: "Lawrence Rhodes"
Subject: Re: [EVDL] [GGEVA]
Here's a reply to this thread that the listserver blocked because it
contained a non-list email address. The author didn't resubmit it after it
was rejected. I hope you find it of value.
--- Forwarded message follows ---
From: "(-Phil-)"
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
85% was for everything between the batteries and the road.
You'll lose some energy in the inverter, some more in the motor, some more in
the drivetrain, and finally some more in the tires.
15% loss (85% efficiency) through ALL of that seems, perhaps, a bit optimistic
even for a Tesla. For one
l.org/attachments/20220106/a2a1d42c/attachment.obj>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: -
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 3588 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20220106/a2a1d
My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
January 5, 2022 1:33 PM, "EV List Lackey via EV" wrote:
> On 5 Jan 2022 at 20:00, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote:
>
>> I will disconnect from the grid and get batteries.
>
> Wouldn't blame you, but can you actually do that? I vaguely recall
On 6 Jan 2022 at 20:47, Peter VanDerWal via EV wrote:
> For one thing, tires on a Tesla are NOT optimized for effiiency, they
> are optimized for traction and low noise.
That's an interesting observation on Tesla's priorities.
I rough-calculated a while back that Spacex's project to lauch
