I still don't see EV's Replacing ICEs.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Toyman! :

There is a 3rd type of load too:  reactive load.  It's produced by giant electric machines that are not using renewable energy.  It is the load that keeps the grid stable.  Without it, there is no grid.  Large plants have to coordinate reactive load changes with grid operators.  

Renewable facilities can (and do) provide reactive power support. Inverters are pretty good at it, actually. They don't have any inertia (unlike spinny machines) so they can vary their reactive output almost instantaneously with appropriate controls. 

In reply to Fupdiggity (Forum Supporter) :

IIRC the main cause of the Chernobyl meltdown was a poorly executed attempt to see how much "throttle response" the reactors could have.  Unfortunately when they tried to, to keep the automotive analogy going, hit the throttle to keep it from stalling, the reactor design had way too much heat in localized areas so it overloaded the cooling system and it boiled over and blew the head gasket.

And that is how an RBMK reactor can have danger to manifold.

Kinda sorta on the analogy.......  but the RMBK reactors had a fatal design flaw.  As the rods were inserted to lower reactivity, reactivity actually increased for the first few centimeters of rod insertion.  This had to do with design of the control rods, how poison was loaded into them and something called void coefficient.

The Russians were conducting a test to see how the reactor responded at low power.  They lost temperature and pressure control at low power and tried increasing temp and pressure by withdrawing rods adding more heat.  It didn't respond....  withdraw rods more....  no response withdraw rods more.....  and again.  Finally with all rods fully withdrawn they saw a response.  Oh my gosh the response.  Oh boy that's too much response, scram the reactor.  They scrammed and due to the design flaw reactivity went up initially not down.  They were already super critical.  The massive reactivity addition in that situation led to instantaneous fuel cell failure.....  a massive nuclear explosion.  The rest is history.  

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

Also known in the automotive world as 'Super Knock' in a direct injected engine (am looking at you, Mazda DISI)

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to frenchyd :

Okay now that we've established only the energy source is free, there is cost associated with making electricity from that source, hence nothing is free.  A lot of your conjecture about blades and lifespan is likely more variable and expensive than you admit.  Also you can't make those blades without petroleum which you fail to acknowledge.  Ever see the amount of oil burning in a windmill gearbox fire?  There is a lot of petroleum at a wind farm.  Ever see all the concrete needed?  Ever take into account how much diesel fuel is needed to get all that concrete to the wind farm?  Ever consider square miles of land use per kilowatt in your discussion?  To replace the generation capacity of the plant I am at right now would take 225 square miles of wind farm.  Sounds lovely right?  
 

Your statement of "free" is only partly true.  To me that makes it pretty dubious.  I'm trying to be nice using dubious by the way.  
 

Thinking about real problems in a vacuum without considering all aspects of an issue isn't a recipe for success.  Green energy isn't green, and that's reality.  Show me green energy that doesn't rely on petroleum at some point. Even old windmills benefited from steel gears and grease.  Try making steel without coal.  

Please do not  assume I'm a stupid purist.  Yes it takes conventional energy creation to make the cement steel copper and fiberglass used to make wind generators. 
  Yes some sites are harsher on equipment than others. 
      If that's your argument. Then you win. 
      My logic is that windmills have worked for centuries. In Holland , here in AMERICAN farm country, ranches etc. They've used them to pump water, Create electricity  etc.  

A former Navy friend of mine acquired a small dairy farm on a Bluff overlooking the MISSISSIPPI. It had an old fashion water pump on a lattice tower.  A few years later he found a 1940's wind generator with the same type of Lattice Tower.  
       He converted all his trucks and tractors to use old cooking oil  that he collects from local business.     I understand he needs to spice it up with corn alcohol to meet cetane requirements.   ;-) 

   I digress, He's off the grid because it would cost something like $35,000 to run power to his farm house back in the mid 1970's   
 Since he doesn't pay for fuel he was able to send his  3 sons to good  colleges  and save towards retirement.  
  It's astonishing what the cost of fuel is over time.  

    Wind mills are more efficient now than 100 years ago. And I imagine they will continue to gain efficiency. 
    Same with solar panels.  I read where in Germany they have flexible solar panels crested on old Newspaper printing presses.   Does that mean prices will continue to drop?   Since the sun powers them directly  I've heard that a relatively modest area of the south west could provide all the electricity needed for America.    So we'd h
     Will they someday  be able to make sails out of solar panels?  
      

In reply to frenchyd :

So where's your solar panels? Wind generator?  How about your EV?

You know those trees you want to remove reprocess CO2 and then produce O2 with it.  And I always thought that was the whole point reducing CO2.  This is a pretty good example of how going green is more about money than the environment in many cases.

In reply to frenchyd :

So frenchy are you saying solar and wind maybe aren't viable for everyone? Seems similar to what this thread is about.

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

tuna55 said:

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

 

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

Amen to that. This thread is depressing. 

In reply to frenchyd :

Which is what we have been tryng to beat into your thick skull. Solar and wind are not a viable option for everyone. 

Fupdiggity (Forum Supporter) said:

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Toyman! :

There is a 3rd type of load too:  reactive load.  It's produced by giant electric machines that are not using renewable energy.  It is the load that keeps the grid stable.  Without it, there is no grid.  Large plants have to coordinate reactive load changes with grid operators.  

Renewable facilities can (and do) provide reactive power support. Inverters are pretty good at it, actually. They don't have any inertia (unlike spinny machines) so they can vary their reactive output almost instantaneously with appropriate controls. 

In terms of the power grid, I wouldn't say either of those statements is particularly correct.

Reactive power is the amount of power stored in the capacitance and inductance of the system.  It's actually bad for the system, because it means that power being produced is going into sustaining electric and magnetic fields instead of powering your TV or running your A/C or computer or vacuum cleaner or whatever.

They are, however, able to balance it in order to minimize the amount of reactance on the system.  Inductors and capacitors essentially cancel each other out in terms of reactance.  You can't really 'adjust' the inductance of the electrical motors on the system, so when lots of electrical motors are running on the system (A/C motors, machining equipment, etc) they add capacitors to the system.  There's not much that really adds a lot of capacitance to the system except long transmission lines, but when they need to add extra inductance they switch on giant inductors (literally just huge coils of copper wire).

In this way they balance the 'power factor' (a measure of how much real power is being delivered vs how much total power is being generated).  They put giant capacitor banks outside of pretty much all generating stations to balance the inductance of the generator, renewable or not.

Source: I used to design the really big specialized switches that turned the capacitor and inductor banks on and off.

tuna55 said:

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

 

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

 

 

As sad as this is going, the current overarching point is valid- it's not applicable to everyone. Right now, we need a small vehicle that can tow 3500lb. There isn't an EV that can do what we need, yet. Heck there are only a handful of hybrids that can. 
 

But the tone is also becoming- everyone else needs to do X. Which is pretty sad. 

In reply to alfadriver :

YEAH, there's really only one person telling others what they should be doing. The rest of us are stating the obvious: WHile these things work for some, they are not a panacea for everyone. 

alfadriver said:

tuna55 said:

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

 

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

 

 

As sad as this is going, the current overarching point is valid- it's not applicable to everyone. Right now, we need a small vehicle that can tow 3500lb. There isn't an EV that can do what we need, yet. Heck there are only a handful of hybrids that can. 
 

But the tone is also becoming- everyone else needs to do X. Which is pretty sad. 

You simply cannot cover everything  in a few sentences.  If you read my postings on the subject you'll see where I am in complete agreement.  
     I am keeping my ICE truck for exactly that sort of situation.  I've written as much several times. 

In reply to frenchyd :

Hello pot. 

In reply to frenchyd :

When I was looking for a forklift, every forklift salesman very specifically recommended not buying an electric truck. Every one of them stated the batteries would not survive my intended use and maintenance would be extremely expensive because of frequent battery replacements. They all universally recommended purchasing an LP-powered truck. 

There is no one size fits all. There never has been. There never will be. 

And I'm still wondering which EV you drive.

tuna55 said:

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

 

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

 

 

Since I started this 30 page poo storm I'll chime in again:

I probably should have been more explicit; while I don't see EVs replacing ICEs, I probably should have said completely replacing ICEs.

Also my comments are very much rooted in how they are being marketed; it's all about "save the planet"

They work well for many people (as yours is working for you) just as pick up trucks work well for many people. My point is/was no one is saying pick ups (EV or ICE) are going to replace all other vehicles.

Tom1200 said:

tuna55 said:

There's people that like to argue on the internet, and people who like to go and do things.

 

I'm almost to 80K miles on my EV that can't replace an ICE, apparently, even though it definitely replaced an ICE. Ya'll have fun arguing about Chernobyl and solar panels. Page 30 looks bad.

 

 

Since I started this 30 page poo storm I'll chime in again:

I probably should have been more explicit; while I don't see EVs replacing ICEs, I probably should have said completely replacing ICEs.

Also my comments are very much rooted in how they are being marketed; it's all about "save the planet"

They work well for many people (as yours is working for you) just as pick up trucks work well for many people. My point is/was no one is saying pick ups (EV or ICE) are going to replace all other vehicles.

Similar to bad headlines, the title name doesn't have the word "all" in there anywhere, so I agree that isn't the point. Also nobody is saying any variant of "all" for this, or for any other car related question. All people shouldn't drive a Miata or a minivan or a truck. All people should rent an apartment, all people shouldn't... whatever.

An EV can absolutely replace an ICE, and has in many cases, including my own (twice).

Back to your regularly scheduled program of arguing about power plants, Mao, and the Rowandan genocide.

tuna55 said

 

Back to your regularly scheduled program of arguing about power plants, Mao, and the Rowandan genocide.

This is outlandish..................are you actually suggesting threads go off the rails here?

And speaking of railroads................are not those vehicles hybrids? Why don't we have sail trains?..........

OK I see your point.

I haven't been a contributor to this thread and I really didn't plan to be, but my goodness, 30 pages!  I just read the last few posts, and I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that maybe there's been a bit of this going on:

Tom1200 said:

tuna55 said

 

Back to your regularly scheduled program of arguing about power plants, Mao, and the Rowandan genocide.

This is outlandish..................are you actually suggesting threads go off the rails here?

And speaking of railroads................are not those vehicles hybrids? Why don't we have sail trains?..........

OK I see your point.

In 55 years, I have never seen a conversation that didn't depart from its original intent. Even meetings with printed itineraries wander on and off topic.

We are not computers that run a program and stop. I learn as much or more from the side tracks as I do from the main track. Sometimes about a different subject, sometimes about the person that is departing from the track. Please continue your widely varied discussions.