User avatar
hill
Gold Member
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:05 pm
Delivery Date: 27 Mar 2011
Leaf Number: 0659
Location: Lake Forest, CA

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:55 am

adric22 wrote:
cgaydos wrote: 1. Synthetic Leather Seats. The early LEAFs had seats based on recycled materials, then in 2013 they add real leather and make it standard on the SL. WTF? Synthetic leather has been around for decades - why kill cows for the seats on a car meant to be environmentally friendly?
I bet cows are more renewable and environmentally friendly than synthetic leather. Just saying.
Maybe not:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/2 ... 91234.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

just sayin' .....
.

User avatar
evnow
Moderator
Posts: 11480
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 am
Delivery Date: 25 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 303
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Fri Sep 19, 2014 2:31 pm

donald wrote:If you are talking about 'environmental impacts' then give up on discussing having more range.

EVs have a lower lifetime CO2 emission because they 'only' have ~25kWh of battery. Double the emissions for producing a battery twice as large and you wipe out the lifetime CO2 savings compared with an equivalent ICE. If you have to replace a battery twice as large during its lifetime, then you've really destroyed the argument for EVs over ICE, on CO2 grounds.
Problem with this argument is the hidden assumption - battery twice as large takes double the emissions to make.

The idea is to advance the technology and get higher density batteries - not just have bigger batteries.
1st Leaf : 2/28/2011 to 5/6/2013
2nd Leaf : 5/4/2013 to 3/21/2017
Volt : 3/25/2017 to 5/25/2018
Model 3 : 5/10/2018 to ?

donald
Posts: 917
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:45 pm
Delivery Date: 29 Jul 2013

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Fri Sep 19, 2014 2:40 pm

evnow wrote:Problem with this argument is the hidden assumption - battery twice as large takes double the emissions to make.
Batteries are, by definition, a pack of repeating cells paralleled and serialed. So twice the capacity will always have twice the embedded carbon. There is no assumption in that, it is a logical statement.

OK, a little margin one way or the other for cell cariers, interconnections, BMS, etc.. But I think you will find that all has a relatively small footprint compared with a few 100 kg of solid battery.

Now, if you're arguing that future batteries will have less embedded carbon, I hope and trust you're right! By God we need to find such solutions!!

But willing for higher capacities prematurely before we have 'low carbon cells' is willing for more embedded carbon in your car. And it is a lot of carbon. You can pretty much go on how much things cost to determine how much carbon is in them. Embedded carbon works like that, it is roughly proportional to manufacturing costs because the pure raw materials, as pulled from the ground, in a thing cost relatively little, it is the energy-intensive processes that turn them from mined/recycled/farmed materials into useful stuff that is usually the bigger cost.

Rebel44
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:20 am

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:34 am

donald wrote:
evnow wrote:Problem with this argument is the hidden assumption - battery twice as large takes double the emissions to make.
Batteries are, by definition, a pack of repeating cells paralleled and serialed. So twice the capacity will always have twice the embedded carbon. There is no assumption in that, it is a logical statement.

OK, a little margin one way or the other for cell cariers, interconnections, BMS, etc.. But I think you will find that all has a relatively small footprint compared with a few 100 kg of solid battery.

Now, if you're arguing that future batteries will have less embedded carbon, I hope and trust you're right! By God we need to find such solutions!!

But willing for higher capacities prematurely before we have 'low carbon cells' is willing for more embedded carbon in your car. And it is a lot of carbon. You can pretty much go on how much things cost to determine how much carbon is in them. Embedded carbon works like that, it is roughly proportional to manufacturing costs because the pure raw materials, as pulled from the ground, in a thing cost relatively little, it is the energy-intensive processes that turn them from mined/recycled/farmed materials into useful stuff that is usually the bigger cost.
Bigger battery allow EV to become more (or even all) driving to be done in EV - eliminating more feul usage by ICE. Over the lifetime of EV it would more than compansate extra cost - both carbon emisions and $$$.
DNAinaGoodWay wrote:I'd like to see some kind of "re-gen light", similar to brake lights, to let drivers behind me know I'm slowing down without braking.
Since its same as light braking, it makes sense to just turn on brake lights whenever you are regen braking - like Tesla MS already does.

GRA
Posts: 11381
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sat Sep 20, 2014 12:54 pm

Rebel44 wrote:
DNAinaGoodWay wrote:I'd like to see some kind of "re-gen light", similar to brake lights, to let drivers behind me know I'm slowing down without braking.
Since its same as light braking, it makes sense to just turn on brake lights whenever you are regen braking - like Tesla MS already does.
If you mean it makes sense to turn on the brake lights whenever you are decelerating at or above a certain rate, then I agree. ISTR a safety reg is being written that will require this. If you mean to turn on the brake lights anytime regen is retarding the vehicle's speed but not decelerating it (as in descending a steep hill), then no.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

donald
Posts: 917
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:45 pm
Delivery Date: 29 Jul 2013

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sat Sep 20, 2014 1:56 pm

Rebel44 wrote:Bigger battery allow EV to become more (or even all) driving to be done in EV - eliminating more feul usage by ICE. Over the lifetime of EV it would more than compansate extra cost - both carbon emisions and $$$.
You're talking there about a 'fleet' lifetime CO2, that is, how different populations of car users ('urban' or 'long distance') use their vehicles.

I agree you have a point, but only where the battery capacity of the pack is being used optimally. If you are talking about having EVs where less than 30% of the battery is being used for the majority of days then, no, the fleet CO2 would be higher. So if one user needs 50 miles a day for 95% of his days and has a Leaf, and another uses 150 miles a day and has a Model S, I'd tend to agree there is more to consider there. But if the 50 mile user had a 85kWh Model S and barely exercised the battery, then his CO2 lifetime emissions would be higher than if he had an ICE - though then there is a secondary argument that by using the battery very little he might then get double the lifetime out of it and if it achieves 20 year lifetime then it might beat ICE.

So I do see merit in your point, but it goes to show that larger battery size options should indeed be 'options'. It would help, perhaps it should be compulsory, that the carbon footprint of vehicle manufacture should be quoted too, along with the mileage. In a way, it makes no sense to declare CO2 for use but not for manufacture. I guess we'll see it required, eventually. You can access some manufacturers' environmental impact reports on their models, but it is few and inconsistent between makers, even models with a maker.

User avatar
DNAinaGoodWay
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:43 am
Delivery Date: 03 Dec 2012
Leaf Number: 23156
Location: Central Massachusetts

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sat Sep 20, 2014 2:07 pm

GRA wrote:
Rebel44 wrote:
DNAinaGoodWay wrote:I'd like to see some kind of "re-gen light", similar to brake lights, to let drivers behind me know I'm slowing down without braking.
Since its same as light braking, it makes sense to just turn on brake lights whenever you are regen braking - like Tesla MS already does.
If you mean it makes sense to turn on the brake lights whenever you are decelerating at or above a certain rate, then I agree. ISTR a safety reg is being written that will require this. If you mean to turn on the brake lights anytime regen is retarding the vehicle's speed but not decelerating it (as in descending a steep hill), then no.
Yes, the first bit is what i meant, when the car is decelerating by regen when i'm not actively touching the brake pedal. Often, other drivers don't realize my car is declerating until they're right on my butt.
'12 SL last reading @ 2 yr, 22k, 260 GIDs, 62.35 Ahr

'15 SV w/QC, Mfd 5/14, Leased 8/14, 292 GIDs, 64.38 Ahr when new
@ 36 months, 34k, 270 GID, 57.49 Ahr

'17 Bolt LT



6.72 kW Array

Rebel44
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:20 am

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:23 am

donald wrote:
Rebel44 wrote:Bigger battery allow EV to become more (or even all) driving to be done in EV - eliminating more feul usage by ICE. Over the lifetime of EV it would more than compansate extra cost - both carbon emisions and $$$.
You're talking there about a 'fleet' lifetime CO2, that is, how different populations of car users ('urban' or 'long distance') use their vehicles.

I agree you have a point, but only where the battery capacity of the pack is being used optimally. If you are talking about having EVs where less than 30% of the battery is being used for the majority of days then, no, the fleet CO2 would be higher. So if one user needs 50 miles a day for 95% of his days and has a Leaf, and another uses 150 miles a day and has a Model S, I'd tend to agree there is more to consider there. But if the 50 mile user had a 85kWh Model S and barely exercised the battery, then his CO2 lifetime emissions would be higher than if he had an ICE - though then there is a secondary argument that by using the battery very little he might then get double the lifetime out of it and if it achieves 20 year lifetime then it might beat ICE.

So I do see merit in your point, but it goes to show that larger battery size options should indeed be 'options'. It would help, perhaps it should be compulsory, that the carbon footprint of vehicle manufacture should be quoted too, along with the mileage. In a way, it makes no sense to declare CO2 for use but not for manufacture. I guess we'll see it required, eventually. You can access some manufacturers' environmental impact reports on their models, but it is few and inconsistent between makers, even models with a maker.
Lifetime CO2 cost of battery can move significantly - lots of it depends on how clean is mining for elements used and how clean is factory making it. Also how long will it be usable.

User avatar
jlv
Moderator
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:08 pm
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2014
Leaf Number: 424487
Location: Massachusetts

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sun Sep 21, 2014 12:59 pm

DNAinaGoodWay wrote:Yes, the first bit is what i meant, when the car is decelerating by regen when i'm not actively touching the brake pedal. Often, other drivers don't realize my car is declerating until they're right on my butt.
When I test drove the Tesla, the "sales associate" told me that the brake lights go on when the regen kicks in after letting my foot off the accelerator. I thought that was a bad idea. A different colored light would be great, though.
LEAF '13 SL+Prem (mfg 12/13, leased 4/14, bought 5/17, sold 11/18) 34K mi, AHr 58, SOH 87%
Tesla S 75D (3/17)
Tesla X 100D (12/18)
88K 100% BEV miles since '14
ICE free since '18

Rebel44
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:20 am

Re: BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF g

Sun Sep 21, 2014 5:56 pm

jlv wrote:
DNAinaGoodWay wrote:Yes, the first bit is what i meant, when the car is decelerating by regen when i'm not actively touching the brake pedal. Often, other drivers don't realize my car is declerating until they're right on my butt.
When I test drove the Tesla, the "sales associate" told me that the brake lights go on when the regen kicks in after letting my foot off the accelerator. I thought that was a bad idea. A different colored light would be great, though.
I dont see why it would be bad idea - to other drivers its signal that you are slowing down and it doesnt matter if you are using brakes or regen braking....

Return to “LEAF Gen 2 & Infiniti EV”