hill
Well-known member
Maybe not:adric22 said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/waste-lagoon_n_3791234.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
just sayin' .....
.
BESIDES MORE RANGE, what would you like to see in LEAF gen 2
- Thread starter JeremyW
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/waste-lagoon_n_3791234.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
just sayin' .....
.
evnow
Well-known member
Problem with this argument is the hidden assumption - battery twice as large takes double the emissions to make.donald said:
The idea is to advance the technology and get higher density batteries - not just have bigger batteries.
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.evnow said:
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.
donald said:
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 said:
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
Well-known member
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.Rebel44 said:
You're talking there about a 'fleet' lifetime CO2, that is, how different populations of car users ('urban' or 'long distance') use their vehicles.Rebel44 said:
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.
DNAinaGoodWay
Well-known member
GRA said:
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.
jlv
Well-known member
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.DNAinaGoodWay said:
epic
Well-known member
moon roof.green as a color
I agree, though I would be a bit more subtle and there would be some 'rate detection' function on throttle position because you might be backing off in a normal flow of traffic downhill (maybe Model S already does this). You do need to avoid the highway situation where controlling speed on the pedal in traffic is met with a constant on-off of the brake light to those following you, as that would be confusing and distracting. (Of course, some people actually drive like that! Fortunately quite few!)Rebel44 said:
Ultimately, this could actually be a more informative signal than a regular ICE brake pedal because with an ICE you can be rolling downhill with the brake light lit yet accelerating on light braking, or rolling uphill off throttle and decelerating with no brake light lit.
donald said:
It would take ages for most drivers to learn that such new light even exist. Current braking lights also dont show any difference between light and heavy braking.
IMO, making things more complicated than absolutely necessary is very bad idea.
JeremyW
Well-known member
AFAIK the Model S brings on the brake lights due to the rate of deceleration (at a certain threshold). There is no need for a different light. If they're stopping, they're stopping, and you should too. 
DNAinaGoodWay
Well-known member
It's been done before, and is in the MB EV now I believe, but I would like a heated windshield. It would be worth paying for, even as an option. In certain weather conditions, I have to use defrost all the time.
It would be really useful to help melt off snow and ice when I've set a timer to preheat when it's unplugged in the parking lot, before I leave work.
It would be really useful to help melt off snow and ice when I've set a timer to preheat when it's unplugged in the parking lot, before I leave work.
greengate
Well-known member
An Italian designer married to a British wife. :lol:
TickTock
Well-known member
Some motorcycles and trucks have a similar feature when engine braking - makes sense for an EV, too.JeremyW said:AFAIK the Model S brings on the brake lights due to the rate of deceleration (at a certain threshold). There is no need for a different light. If they're stopping, they're stopping, and you should too.
Moof
Well-known member
donald said:
Nice write-up:
http://environment.ucla.edu/media/files/BatteryElectricVehicleLCA2012.pdf
Indeed, the battery carbon footprint of a Leaf sized battery is non-trivial. However you start with 2:1 head start over an ICE in life-cycle energy usage, and the battery itself (partial replacement was included in the study) takes about 10% of an ICE's lifetime energy usage to manufacture. A bigger battery is less likely to be replaced over the life of a car (a 30% drop in a Leaf's already short range is crippling, a 30% drop in a 150 mile battery would still be quite usable).
Probably the better takeaway is that a BEV is only modestly better than a hybrid in life cycle footprint, and with a bigger battery that advantage would be nullified. There is plenty of room to point out that fossil fuels and electricity are not fully equivalent from an environmental impact point of view, but that is a separate debate.
NasGoreList
Well-known member
looks makeover, this would be a good start:
DNAinaGoodWay said:
Ford tried to do that back in the mid 80's when the Taurus/Sable was first introduced. It was called an "InstaClear" windshield: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quickclear" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
However it did not seem to be popular, as Ford has not offered it here in some time that I am aware of (at least not for Ford and Mercury brands). I've driven European Fords that had it as late as 2004, but I don't know if it's still offered over there (where it's called "QuickClear"). The windshields themselves are quite expensive and in many parts of the country, cracked windshields are quite common, so insurance rates could be a reason why it hasn't been implemented here, especially in states where no-cost windshield replacement by your insurance is a requirement.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
The Definitive "CLICKING NOISE FROM FRONT OR REAR AXLE DURING TAKE-OFF/ACCELERATION" list
- Latest: KeepTheCoalInTheHole
-