Tesla has now produced 1 million Electric cars in total.

[Nobodytoyou]

I'm hoping this breakthrough comes to fruition;

https://news.utexas.edu/2017/02/28/goodenough-introduces-new-battery-technology/

Was Co-researched with the original inventor of the LI-Ion battery and his under study Maria Helena Braga. If the improvements come to be would be a huge leap in battery tech.

 

The improvements that tech could bring would make EV's better then ICE in almost every manner.

Personally I just want a retrofit kit so I can keep my current truck but convert it to electric. (and not buying the cyber truck way to ugly, same with the rivian, though the Altis truck looks really nice.)

[jagdtigger]

21 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

ust a recent example of battery innovation has been progress in the introduction of graphene on a larger commercial scale

So far every single one of these breakthroughs failed at some point(expensive materials/manufacturing, undesirable side effects, etc). ATM it is a dead end and shouldnt be pushed forcibly onto consumers.

 

18 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

I've never heard of supercharging being an issue for battery cycles

The more amps you push above 1C the faster the battery will degrade, thus lessens the available charge cycles before EOL. No matter what thy did to the battery as long as it uses Li it will have this short coming.

 

18 hours ago, Kilrah said:

Supercharger is about 1C, not more.

At that rate it would take 3 hours to charge it up fully(assuming an almost empty battery)  so i dont think so.

 

18 hours ago, Commodus said:

The problem at present isn't a general limitation on battery production; it's a limitation on production at companies that aren't Tesla. 

To the world at large its still an issue....

 

18 hours ago, Commodus said:

but it's not clear you'll be paying just as much as you would at the pump.

But it will lessen EV's advantage greatly over IC cars.

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

I understand that the first source is pretty click-bait-ey, but overall, what they are saying makes scientific sense (more professional source in the second link ). It seems like, yes in fact, you can just treat batteries with "graphene magic". 

 

Quote from the CEO of Real Graphene:

“Graphene is an amazing conductor of heat and electricity. Lithium doesn’t like it when you put a lot of energy in and when you take a lot of energy out. We’ve applied graphene in two different ways. We mix it in the solution with lithium, plus we’ve add a composite layer, like a sheet of it, in the lithium battery. It acts as a conductor for the electricity, and doesn’t generate as much heat.”

 

I understand people doubt the authenticity of start-ups and new tech companies nowadays, but what they are promising makes sense from a scientific stand-point. The company was founded byUC Berkeley grads who were researching graphene and have managed to produce reasonably high-quality graphene sheets for reasonable costs. Again, I understand the credibility of Berkeley graduates isn't the highest (most higher education is called into question these days), but these aren't unreasonable claims.

 

Obviously, this isn't Tesla, but it seems that the usage of graphene isn't the problem. The problem has been the cost of the process to create graphene as well as the purity/shape of the graphene that is used (which seems to be improving).

 

https://www.realgrapheneusa.com/graphene

https://www.digitaltrends.com/features/real-graphene-battery-interview-samuel-gong-ces-2020/

 

“mix it” huh?  Graphene isn’t a liquid.  Also “like a sheet of it” stinks of bs as well. Graphene is ALWAYS a mono molecular thin sheet.  The 3D variant of hexomolecular carbon is better known as “diamond”.  There is no “like” about it.

 

They could mix shreds into the electrolyte I suppose.  It would transfer heat along the length of the shred.  Graphene can be used as an electrical and heat conductor.  What makes batteries produce electricity is a chemical reaction though.  They’re not themselves actually electrical in function.

[Nobodytoyou]

22 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

The more amps you push above 1C the faster the battery will degrade, thus lessens the available charge cycles before EOL. No matter what thy did to the battery as long as it uses Li it will have this short coming.

 

At that rate it would take 3 hours to charge it up fully(assuming an almost empty battery)  so i dont think so.

This needs some correction, 1C charging would take 1 hour as C is the rating for 1 hour of discharge/ or charge.

If it takes 3 hours then they are Charging at C3 which means 1/3 C (Battery rating are really really stupid sometimes)

now to Charge at 1C for a the battery in a tesla you would need some insane power i don't even think the super chargers can achieve it.

Also for damaging Li-ion batteries, charging above 80% capacity and discharging below 20% do far more damage than quick charging. If you can limit the charge cycle to stay within those ranges Li-Ion batteries can last close to 5 times the cycles than if you are charging and discharging from 100% to 0%. (Tesla's have a built in charge limiter that prevent the battery from being charged to 100% unless you specify for the battery to take a full charge, this helps keep the batteries lasting longer and for everyday commutes and most trips as you don't need the battery topped to 100% unless your going on a road trip.)

[jagdtigger]

3 minutes ago, Nobodytoyou said:

This needs some correction, 1C charging would take 1 hour as C is rating rating for 1 hour of discharge/ or charge.

Normal charging starts with CC then continued with CV. If you force 1C the whole time it will degrade the battery faster than the normal.

[Nobodytoyou]

11 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Normal charging starts with CC then continued with CV. If you force 1C the whole time it will degrade the battery faster than the normal.

While your are correct in charging methods, for the rating they just refer to it as C.

for those more interested in the topic: https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/charging_lithium_ion_batteries

Now the caveat is, that is for cobalt blended batteries which are the more common Li-ion you will find, however in recent years most manufactures are switching to Li-ion chemistries that have no cobalt. While i don't know the specifics of how that affects the charge times I do wonder what effects it has.

[Kilrah]

2 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Normal charging starts with CC then continued with CV. If you force 1C the whole time it will degrade the battery faster than the normal.

1C charge means 1C during the CC phase. For a healthy battery the CV phase should only be about the last 15-20%, resulting in about 1h20 total charge from empty. 

[thechinchinsong]

5 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

So far every single one of these breakthroughs failed at some point(expensive materials/manufacturing, undesirable side effects, etc). ATM it is a dead end and shouldnt be pushed forcibly onto consumers.

 

The more amps you push above 1C the faster the battery will degrade, thus lessens the available charge cycles before EOL. No matter what thy did to the battery as long as it uses Li it will have this short coming.

 

At that rate it would take 3 hours to charge it up fully(assuming an almost empty battery)  so i dont think so.

 

To the world at large its still an issue....

 

But it will lessen EV's advantage greatly over IC cars.

The point is that the discussion is on Tesla, and since it isn't (and won't be in the near future) be a problem for Tesla, then I don't understand how Tesla as a company can be seen as a dead end. Nobody is forcibly pushing Tesla onto consumers, consumers are embracing Tesla more and more so (recently investors and Tesla skeptics to some degree as well).

[thechinchinsong]

5 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

“mix it” huh?  Graphene isn’t a liquid.  Also “like a sheet of it” stinks of bs as well. Graphene is ALWAYS a mono molecular thin sheet.  The 3D variant of hexomolecular carbon is better known as “diamond”.  There is no “like” about it.

 

They could mix shreds into the electrolyte I suppose.  It would transfer heat along the length of the shred.  Graphene can be used as an electrical and heat conductor.  What makes batteries produce electricity is a chemical reaction though.  They’re not themselves actually electrical in function.

How does  “like a sheet of it” stink of BS if you literally say in the next sentence that Graphene is ALWAYS a mono-molecular thin sheet. The sources literally say that SINCE graphene is a superior electrical and heat conductor, they use those properties to enhance existing Lithium battery cells. This isn't nuclear fusion, where nothing close to demonstration has ever been produced. Graphene has been used in batteries to improve on various functions before, its that the costs and complexities associated with it are too much to move to consumers. Anyways, the point that I had bringing up graphene batteries is that the technology behind batteries hasn't plateaued and will still improve. Yes, I know believing in scientific research is considered naive nowadays, but its certainly proof that these things can be done (and done on a commercial scale).

[Bombastinator]

44 minutes ago, thechinchinsong said:

How does  “like a sheet of it” stink of BS if you literally say in the next sentence that Graphene is ALWAYS a mono-molecular thin sheet. The sources literally say that SINCE graphene is a superior electrical and heat conductor, they use those properties to enhance existing Lithium battery cells. This isn't nuclear fusion, where nothing close to demonstration has ever been produced. Graphene has been used in batteries to improve on various functions before, its that the costs and complexities associated with it are too much to move to consumers. Anyways, the point that I had bringing up graphene batteries is that the technology behind batteries hasn't plateaued and will still improve. Yes, I know believing in scientific research is considered naive nowadays, but its certainly proof that these things can be done (and done on a commercial scale).

The “like”.  As if there’s another type.  They’re having to imply it comes in another form to make the liquid thing work.

[thechinchinsong]

Just now, Bombastinator said:

The “like”.  As if there’s another type.  They’re having to imply it comes in another form to make the liquid thing work.

I think you're reading too much into the semantics of the article. Its written by Digital Trends, reporting on an new company's (Real Graphene) technology. It's not a peer reviewed paper in which the semantics matter (as much). The explanation that the CEO provides in the snippet I quoted is simply an explanation to the reporter who might not be familiar with the field.

 

Here is another quote from the CEO further down the article, talking about their company manufacturing graphene for other interested companies:

 

“Adding a graphene sheet doesn’t affect the attributes of a cell. It’s only one-to-five atomic layers thick, and this doesn’t affect the physical properties at all. It’s an easy plug-and-play, because the cells can be the same shape and size. You get the immediate benefits of graphene,” Gong enthused."

 

If they meant a type of carbon other than the "one-to-five atomic layers thick" graphene that is used, then they would have used the term graphite (which is used multiple times in the same Digital Trends article). They know the difference, and even point out that there exist cheaper graphite batteries that have been the the market for some time now, but do not yield the same performance results as their own product.

 

If your implication is that this person is intentionally misleading their customers by advertising the use of graphene, but actually using graphite, then I think you are mistaken.

 

As for the usability of graphene in a solution and in forms other than large sheets or layers, graphene, in the form of nano-platelets, can be used by itself as well as in various solutions for a variety of enhanced electrical properties and effects.

 

So yes, the term graphene means two dimensional hexagonal lattices of carbon (taken straight from wikipedia), but that doesn't mean the only form graphene can be used is strictly sheets or layers of said material. Again, the point I mean to make when I brought up graphene enhanced lithium batteries is that battery technology is not stagnate, and that because of that, one of the main parts of the Tesla business is not a "dead end".

 

Sources:

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01506

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/adfm.201403836

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/nn3034309

[Engineer.AI]

21 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

The S was a bit that way.  It’s not the only model they make though.  The cars are only slightly more expensive than gas cars but are cheaper to run so the prices is about the same.  It’s sort of like paying for your gas up front.  Most of the price of the car is batteries, and battery prices are coming down.

That is a really swell way to put it. Really hoping on other companies to pick up the slack, and make electric powered vehicles - sooner than later!

~engineer.AI

[RejZoR]

22 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

The S was a bit that way.  It’s not the only model they make though.  The cars are only slightly more expensive than gas cars but are cheaper to run so the prices is about the same.  It’s sort of like paying for your gas up front.  Most of the price of the car is batteries, and battery prices are coming down.

Slightly? You can get a very well equipped petrol hatchback for 15k €. I'm talking properly sized Hyundai i30 sort, not some VW Up! toy. You basically can't get a single EV under 30k € (Hyundai Ioniq, Hyundai Kona, Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe (with bought batteries), VW Golf E or even Tesla 3. Not even with country eco incentives. 5k € would be "a bit". 15k difference is massive. For that kind of difference I have all the petrol, services, insurance and ALL the expenses like tires and wearable spare parts like wipers covered for 10 years period. I'm talking my specific case, but still. It just makes no sense unless you do stupid much driving so you even have a chance to bring in the difference in "fuel" savings. Or just have cash to piss away and you just don't care for as long as it's "eco". Sure, I want one coz it would work for my use, but is it financially feasible? Not at all. Like totally not.

[Bombastinator]

22 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

Does graphene not help with any of those three factors? Also, specifically for cost, I thought you said earlier that the cheapest Teslas weren't that much more expensive than their luxury sedan counterparts (i.e. Tesla model 3)? I thought graphene did actually help with charging speed as well as battery wear, especially when integrated into existing Lithium batteries. Maybe I'm mistaken. This in turn translates into reduced costs (since there will be less need for redundant cells in EV battery packs).

I didn’t say that.  The cheap ones still aren’t particularly cheap.  It’s possible to pay 80k for a new S and 40k for a new model 3 though.

[thechinchinsong]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

I didn’t say that.  The cheap ones still aren’t particularly cheap.  It’s possible to pay 80k for a new S and 40k for a new model 3 though.

Agreed. What is the cheapest vehicle that you believe is on a roughly equal footing with the model 3 in terms of features? Base model civic or camry (although I wouldn't really call those luxury sedans)? What do you think is a good price for Tesla's entry level cars? I think Tesla still has about 5-10 thousand dollars to go before actually hitting a more mainstream audience.

[Bombastinator]

54 minutes ago, thechinchinsong said:

Agreed. What is the cheapest vehicle that you believe is on a roughly equal footing with the model 3 in terms of features? Base model civic or camry (although I wouldn't really call those luxury sedans)? What do you think is a good price for Tesla's entry level cars? I think Tesla still has about 5-10 thousand dollars to go before actually hitting a more mainstream audience.

I don’t know.  Maybe none.  The issue is tesla has a gigantic advantage over all the other car companies in three areas, and some problems in two others.

advantages:
1. battery type.  They designed their own cell which they manufacture that was made specifically for electric cars.  It’s got a lower ma/s output so it can only be used effectively in large battery packs,  but it’s total mah and number of useful cycles is extremely good.

2. battery controls.  The controls for their battery packs are very advanced.  They control and charge their batteries better, they have individual cell fusing, they have battery pack temp control.  This last is only really useful in the winter in colder areas.

3. Motor design.  Tesla uses a magnet system where the motor is made up of a series of magnets glued together with opposing polarities.  This makes the magnetic field they create much smaller and more efficient.  They literally get more power out of each mah.

 

I saw it estimated that these three areas represented a ten year advancement over all other car companies.

 

disadvantages:

frame design.  Teslas have overbuilt frames.  They use more parts.  This makes them more expensive.  One odd example is all the Tesla’s look very similar but each one has a different door latch and door handle design.

interior design.  Tesla did it’s interior design from scratch, and they don’t have the interior materials experience the other car companies do.

 

[suicidalfranco]

8 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Slightly? You can get a very well equipped petrol hatchback for 15k €. I'm talking properly sized Hyundai i30 sort, not some VW Up! toy. You basically can't get a single EV under 30k € (Hyundai Ioniq, Hyundai Kona, Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe (with bought batteries), VW Golf E or even Tesla 3. Not even with country eco incentives. 5k € would be "a bit". 15k difference is massive. For that kind of difference I have all the petrol, services, insurance and ALL the expenses like tires and wearable spare parts like wipers covered for 10 years period. I'm talking my specific case, but still. It just makes no sense unless you do stupid much driving so you even have a chance to bring in the difference in "fuel" savings. Or just have cash to piss away and you just don't care for as long as it's "eco". Sure, I want one coz it would work for my use, but is it financially feasible? Not at all. Like totally not.

next year Dacia Spring should cover that. An EV SUV that costs below 20k.

 

Meanwhile i'm here wondering who would pay 40k for a EV 500 Dolce Vita, when you can get a LPG Dolce Vita for half that (my dream small car)

[Bombastinator]

6 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

Agreed. What is the cheapest vehicle that you believe is on a roughly equal footing with the model 3 in terms of features? Base model civic or camry (although I wouldn't really call those luxury sedans)? What do you think is a good price for Tesla's entry level cars? I think Tesla still has about 5-10 thousand dollars to go before actually hitting a more mainstream audience.

Haven’t looked at em.  Neither one as far as running gear goes.

 

As for tesla pricking the word is it’s mostly dependent on battery cost which is apparently coming down.  How far and how fast for how long is unknown.

[Brooksie359]

3 hours ago, comander said:

You can rent cars. 

While true I still imagine not alot of people wanting to hassel with renting a car every time they need to travel if they do so on a frequent basis. 

[Bombastinator]

15 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

While true I still imagine not alot of people wanting to hassel with renting a car every time they need to travel if they do so on a frequent basis. 

A complete absence on non electric cars would hamper traveling salesmen.  They’d have to go back to the more standard methods of public transportation.  It worked ok for a hundred years. The number of people who travel 300+ miles at a shot more than every month or so is quite small.

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, comander said:

Let's assume the current improvements in battery tech materialize at scale. 

 

The 300 mile range becomes 500 miles.

Probably more like 650 if you change during lunch. 

 

650 will get you from Florida to New England. 

 

Hell, a "mere" 300 is basically LA to San Francisco. 

 

The groups it doesn't work for will be those doing long stretches in the middle of nowhere. 

 

Probably my father who does trips from Texas to Washington or Texas to Maine. Not me. 

You are banking on there being a charge station at your destination if you are only calculating how far that range gets you on a one way trip. If your destination does not have a charge station then that range has to get you there and back along with all other miles your drive while at said destination. The fact is it would be a pain in the ass to do any sort of long distance travel with an electric car. 

[ARikozuM]

"Electric cars are powered by coal-fired plants and the subsidies take away from public transit" - comments in this thread

 

Really?! When are you going to speak out over the billions given to oil producers and the wasteful ethanol market? Oh, you aren't? This isn't the thread for that? Convenient. 

 

We need more electric vehicles that are powered by far more efficient power plants such as nuclear, solar, and coal. We also need hydrogen vehicles. Reason? Variety makes us stronger. IF gas has an issue or shortage, at least there are vehicles that don't utilize it. 

[leadeater]

On 3/14/2020 at 3:53 AM, Bombastinator said:

Teslas have overbuilt frames.  They use more parts.  This makes them more expensive.

That doesn't really make it such a bad thing, if it's adding strength and additional safety then it becomes a subjective cost argument of how much are you willing to pay for safety. On the other hand not everyone is able to actually make a choice due to finances so have to go bottom rung, that is where vehicle safety laws are necessary though. 

 

Most cars, I really do mean most cars, were considered safe at the time they were introduced on to the market but today are all considered near as much death traps. I don't think that is much of an ongoing issue as before but it's likely still going to be a thing. It's hard to say today that a frame is overbuilt and unnecessary without considering what may be the normal in 10 years. I wouldn't willingly drive a 1990's Honda Civic in to a wall at 30 KM/h but I would for 2015 Model, you couldn't even pay me for that 90's model. 

[Brooksie359]

53 minutes ago, comander said:

I'm going to assume you don't live in a major city. 

 

They're everywhere in LA and SF. 

 

Let me rephrase. They're everywhere. 

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.co/2020/01/01/tesla-updates-2020-supercharger-map/amp/

 

 

The typical Tesla customer is a city hopping 6 figure income type that is probably fine limiting themselves to a hotel with a charger... Assuming they aren't flying. 

You are basically agreeing with me then that the market is quite limited. Also I do live in a major city just not one that has alot of charge stations. California is somewhat of an oddity as they have places to charge stations almost everywhere including malls and parking ramps. 

[Bombastinator]

21 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That doesn't really make it such a bad thing, if it's adding strength and additional safety then it becomes a subjective cost argument of how much are you willing to pay for safety. On the other hand not everyone is able to actually make a choice due to finances so have to go bottom rung, that is where vehicle safety laws are necessary though. 

 

Most cars, I really do mean most cars, were considered safe at the time they were introduced on to the market but today are all considered near as much death traps. I don't think that is much of an ongoing issue as before but it's likely still going to be a thing. It's hard to say today that a frame is overbuilt and unnecessary without considering what may be the normal in 10 years. I wouldn't willingly drive a 1990's Honda Civic in to a wall at 30 KM/h but I would for 2015 Model, you couldn't even pay me for that 90's model. 

I personally think the advantages drastically outweigh the disadvantages.  They’re what the rest of the world has got though so they’re being played up pretty hard.  Had to be mentioned.