Formula E Now Has World Championship Status

[jonelsorel]

I looked up that webpage which you linked. I don't know who made it, but he clearly doesn't know what is he talking about regarding to any subjects. There are also no citations anywhere.

1. I'm pretty sure you weren't able to spot his name, which is given on the right side of his blog. Talk about proof reading.
2. If you need citations for everything you read, it means that you either didn't catch much in school or are unwilling/unable to go look for them yourself. They call it the Information age.

I agree with you. it took me all of 10 minutes to find multiple, credible sources for generator thermal efficiency, power line transmission losses, and electric motor efficiency. The dude is dead wrong and his logic is crap

You're funny. If something is beyond your level of understanding, raise it. If googling "power generation losses" is too much, your opinion stays just an opinion. No need for "hating", even if that's where you want to bring it.


Energy lost in power plants: About 65%, or 22 quadrillion Btus in the U.S. in 2013

Energy lost in transmission and distribution: About 6% – 2% in transmission and 4% in distribution – or 69 trillion Btus in the U.S. in 2013

Adding Up The Losses

• Generating electricity, we lost 22 quadrillion Btu from coal, natural gas, nuclear and petroleum power plants in 2013 in the U.S. – that’s more than the energy in all the gasoline we use in a given year.
• Moving electricity from plants to homes and businesses on the transmission and distribution grid, we lost 69 trillion Btu in 2013 – that’s about how much energy Americans use drying our clothes every year.

Lost In Transmission: How Much Electricity Disappears Between A Power Plant And Your Plug?

How much energy is lost along the way as electricity travels from a power plant to the plug in your home? This question comes from Jim Barlow, a Wyoming architect, through our IE Questions project. To find the answer, we need to break it out step by step: first turning raw materials into...

insideenergy.org

Your article states:

“EVs convert about 59%–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels. Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17%–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels.”

0.65 * 0.62 = 40.3% efficiency

Gasoline already hit 45%, by WLTP standards.

Record efficiency for a gas engine

At the end of May, the final meeting of the "Horizon 2020" project "GasOn" with the EU Commission took place in Brussels. The aim of this EU project was the further development of gas engines for cars and vans. Around 20 partners participated, including ETH Zurich and Empa as well as four...

phys.org

日経クロステック（xTECH）

テクノロジーの進化によって様々な業界の境界（クロス）領域で新たなビジネスが続々と誕生する今、どこの誰と、どう組めば新たなチャンスを掴むことができるのか。日経クロステック（xTECH）は、 ITから電機、自動車、建設、土木まで、今をえぐり、一歩先を照らす情報をお届けします。

tech.nikkeibp.co.jp

Add to that all the rare materials you need to mine for batteries and the energy spent in the manufacturing processes involved and you may start understanding something. It's one thing to produce aluminum, cast iron or steel, quite another to make a half ton battery.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

 

[dene11]

What a joke this political championship is.

Electric Vehicles Will Never be used on a Large Scale.

www.nov79.com

For example, goverments support of motorism (motosport secondary) in 1920 and 1930 years was the same. Everything on the world is political question new technologies especially.

 

[jonelsorel]

New technologies that require you to hunt for rare materials in rich third world countries that need democracy are good, ya. Add to that the fact that China, where most EV manufacturers, including Tesla, build their batteries, just announced that they're adding 148 gigawatts of energy production from coal plants, or EU's entire capacity. You don't see Greta mentioning that in her scripted speeches. But who cares as long as pollution is shifted out of sight?

Subscribe to read

www.ft.com

 

[Sasha Jednak]

1. I'm pretty sure you weren't able to spot his name, which is given on the right side of his blog. Talk about proof reading.
2. If you need citations for everything you read, it means that you either didn't catch much in school or are unwilling/unable to go look for them yourself. They call it the Information age.

1. When you go on home page of his blog, yes there is his name and also link to page "About author" (I'll get back to that page below)

2. Citations are used when you put some fact in your paper to show from where you got it: was it other paper, your experiment (again other paper) or something else. Without those it is just thinking out loud. But anyway, I took your suggestion and went to search for that author, conclusion is below.

Reading through "About author" page, I stumbled on his disapproval of kinetic energy equation and his proof that almost whole physics is wrong (now to be true my math teacher in 6th grade showed me how to prove that 1+2 is not 3, so ). Later in search results for his name I saw he wants to replace kinetic energy equation by momentum equation. I mean, okay, it looks like he likes science and he did a lot of stuff. But it also looks like someone who can overnight put 5000 letters paper on "earth is flat". All that by just looking at facts that are good for his theory but completely ignoring ones that are not.

Enough about him, can you explain me 65% (loses in power plants) x 62% (Ev efficiency) compared to Nissan's 45% (motor thermal efficiency) ? Because I don't see that you multiplied that (Nissan's motor efficiency) with anything that was used for production of that gasoline. I mean, if you go like that then we can look only at electric motor efficiency in first case and that will give us 85%, or look on the whole EV which gives as said 59-62% (still bigger than 45%).

P.S. In all talk about loses you calculated EV efficiency as loses in plants * EV efficiency. It should be non-loses and give 35% * 62%. Which is even better for you. Now, there is also a fact that I am typing this during break at work so I maybe comparing apples and oranges, or not, who will know... About batteries, later in some of next posts.

 

[DonZmeuheu]

What is odd is people that don't like electric just can't be neutral
It does not affect you so why even go on about it

Do you see electric fans bagging other motorsports ?

How dare are you? This is all wrong.... I should be in school on the other side of the ocean

 

[UMC 22]

What is odd is people that don't like electric just can't be neutral

Well, you shouldn't really paint everyone with the same brush. I don't like electric yet am entirely neutral. It doesn't bother me that Formula E exists, I'm not going to slate anyone for enjoying it, and it probably is the (hopefully distant) future of motorsports. But it's just not for me.

Also, it takes people from both sides to have a discussion, which is what a forum is all about. If people aren't allowed to disagree with each other or like/dislike different things, then what's the point in having the ability to post comments at all? Not all discussions need to end up as stupid arguments... that only happens when people are incapable of conducting themselves in a civil manner while disagreeing with each other.

 

[jonelsorel]

Sasha, since when does producing diesel or gasoline from crude oil consume close to the same amount of energy than producing a batery from numerous minerals you usually obtain through levelling mountains? No citation needed.

The more stages you have inbetween production and consumption of energy, the more losses you incur, irregardles of what those stages are. It's the same with food: the farther it is from the sun (ie from plants, which convert light into chemical energy), the less energy/mass you get. Add to that the fact that electric cars' batteries lose up to 40% of their capacity in winter, which is nowhere close to what you get with combustion engines.

And yes, huge chunks of modern "science" are indeed wrong, mainly because of financial interest.

 

[Dobermann92]

1. I'm pretty sure you weren't able to spot his name, which is given on the right side of his blog. Talk about proof reading.
2. If you need citations for everything you read, it means that you either didn't catch much in school or are unwilling/unable to go look for them yourself. They call it the Information age.

1. So he wrote all of those articles about biology, physics, moral philosophy and others alone? I doubt he has sufficient knowledge in those topics judging by his faulty reasoning and subjectivity.

Read these and you will notice how bad his reasoning is:

Yellowstone as an Asteroid Strike.

Yellowstone is not a super volcano, it is an asteroid strike.

www.nov79.com

Science As Religion.

www.nov79.com

2. You cannot build a science from the ground up, you need to cite the things you are basing your theory on. He is trying to prove something to me, so he has the burden of proof, why should I look for those?

 

[Sasha Jednak]

Sasha, since when does producing diesel or gasoline from crude oil consume close to the same amount of energy than producing a batery from numerous minerals you usually obtain through levelling mountains? No citation needed.

I am not trying to argue about losses in production, that's exact thing I am trying to exclude from comparing CARS EFFICIENCY. I see that as efficiency of complete car on a road as: electricity/gasoline input -> power on wheels. I am not trying to go into how are Lithium, Zinc, Nickel, Cadmium, etc mined. As for citation, searching for each of these and how they are mined/extracted was easy. Not so much mountain leveling mentioned (at least not for anything that is used for nothing else than for EV), I'll check later when I get time more on this.

The more stages you have inbetween production and consumption of energy, the more losses you incur, irregardles of what those stages are. It's the same with food: the farther it is from the sun (ie from plants, which convert light into chemical energy), the less energy/mass you get. Add to that the fact that electric cars' batteries lose up to 40% of their capacity in winter, which is nowhere close to what you get with combustion engines.

And yes, huge chunks of modern "science" are indeed wrong, mainly because of financial interest.

Agree with more stages more losses As for 40% losses in extreme weather, it's not that bad as it can be seen here (with links on some keywords).

One more thing, I am neutral on this topic. Just want to show that EV are judged to harsh, while they are not that bad as "other side" is trying to prove (which is normal in industry, gasoline side wants no change to protect their lead and others want change to try to take that lead).

Spoiler: just business

 

[Jeremy Talbot]

Stop the car and battery swapping and write the rule book around a longer race formula (full GP length or even something like 2+ hours) and force teams to fast charge the cars.

They've actually stopped changing cars since the introduction of the gen2 cars. I completely agree with you about longer races, ie a good 2 hours or so, and about better tracks. I just love the way they race and the fact they don't get so spread out, plus they actually bang each other around a bit which is cool to see.

But it's a divisive formula, I understand that, so each to their own

 

[jonelsorel]

@sasha: if EV's were judged too harsh, we wouldn't have world governments pushing to introduce them by offering subsidies while (1) the charging infrastructure largely sucks in most parts of the world, (2) power capacities are already hit in some cities in Sweden and California, and (3) we need to produce more electricity to sustain the big distraction. When they are already less energy efficient than internal combustion engines for the simple fact they add an extra stage between energy production and consumption AND with a higher price when it comes to materials used energy spent producing them. Go figure nobody wants to include that in the equation, the screaming skeleton in the closet. One of the studies actually judged harsh is the one sponsored by the government of Sweden, a country within the top 3 regarding EV adoption. It was saying that the production of a Tesla battery produces as much pollution as driving a gasoline car for 8 years. Sweden must definitely want to switch back to internal combustion, eh?. Who cares for the fact that current recycling infrastructure is not able to process more than 60% of a an EV's battery? Who cares for the fact that the world's 15 largest ships pollute every day as much as the world's 780 million cars (there are 53000+ ships in the world), and governments united tackle individual human transportation first?

Rising smartphone demand was already putting a huge strain on supplying those rare minerals needed, now we're to multiply that by a factor of 10, 100, 1000 for the wellbeing of planet. People generally care as much for 10 year old children mining up the cobalt needed for batteries as they care for the fact that the China is mainly using coal to power its industry. And Tesla wants to build an electric SUV, while cheap internal combustion engines get politically downsized beyond their efficiency point, so they can be banned faster (the biggest engines out there are the most thermally efficient ones). A better world for all indeed. I guess that if you really can't produce enough crises and wars to make oil more expensive, you have to step it up.

"Earlier this year, the physicist Christoph Buchal and I published a research paper showing that, in the context of Germany’s energy mix, an EV emits a bit more CO2 than a modern diesel car, even though its battery offers drivers barely more than half the range of a tank of diesel. And shortly thereafter, data published by VW confirmed that its e-Rabbit vehicle emits slightly more CO2 than its Rabbit Diesel within the German energy mix. (When based on the overall European energy mix, which includes a huge share of nuclear energy from France, the e-Rabbit fares slightly better than the Rabbit Diesel.)

Adding further evidence, the Austrian thinktank Joanneum Research has just published a large-scale study commissioned by the Austrian automobile association, ÖAMTC, and its German counterpart, ADAC, that also confirms those findings. According to this study, a mid-sized electric passenger car in Germany must drive 219,000 km before it starts outperforming the corresponding diesel car in terms of CO2 emissions. The problem, of course, is that passenger cars in Europe last for only 180,000km, on average. Worse, according to Joanneum, EV batteries don’t last long enough to achieve that distance in the first place. Unfortunately, drivers’ anxiety about the cars’ range prompts them to recharge their batteries too often, at every opportunity, and at a high speed, which is bad for durability.

As for EU lawmakers, there are now only two explanations for what is going on: either they didn’t know what they were doing, or they deliberately took Europeans for a ride. Both scenarios suggest that the EU should reverse its interventionist industrial policy, and instead rely on market-based instruments such as a comprehensive emissions trading system."

New report highlights climate footprint of electric car battery production

In the quest for greater mileage per charge, electric car batteries are getting much bigger. But since battery production is energy consuming and to some extent cancels out climate benefit, it is vital that production becomes more energy efficient and that the use of fossil electricity is...

www.ivl.se

Are electric vehicles really so climate friendly?

EVs produce more CO2 than say diesel – it’s just they emit via the power plant not the exhaust pipe

www.theguardian.com

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

With Blackouts, California's Electric Car Owners Are Finding New Ways To Charge Up

Nearly half of all the electric cars in the country are owned in California. But the recent wildfires and power outages are inspiring some drivers to use their cars to power their homes.

www.npr.org

Children as young as seven mining cobalt used in smartphones, says Amnesty

Amnesty International says it has traced cobalt used in batteries for household brands to mines in DRC, where children work in life-threatening conditions

www.theguardian.com

 

[Dobermann92]

@sasha: if EV's were judged too harsh, we wouldn't have world governments pushing to introduce them by offering subsidies while (1) the charging infrastructure largely sucks in most parts of the world, (2) power capacities are already hit in some cities in Sweden and California, and (3) we need to produce more electricity to sustain the big distraction. When they are already less energy efficient than internal combustion engines for the simple fact they add an extra stage between energy production and consumption AND with a higher price when it comes to materials used energy spent producing them. Go figure nobody wants to include that in the equation, the screaming skeleton in the closet. One of the studies actually judged harsh is the one sponsored by the government of Sweden, a country within the top 3 regarding EV adoption. It was saying that the production of a Tesla battery produces as much pollution as driving a gasoline car for 8 years. Sweden must definitely want to switch back to internal combustion. Who cares for the fact that current recycling infrastructure is not able to process more than 60% of a an EV's battery? Who cares for the fact that the world's 15 largest ships pollute every day as much as the world's 780 million cars (there are 53000+ ships in the world), and governments united tackle individual human transportation first?

Rising smartphone demand was already putting a huge strain on supplying those rare minerals needed, now we're to multiply that by a factor of 10, 100, 1000 for the wellbeing of planet. People generally care as much for 10 year old children mining up the cobalt needed for batteries as they care for the fact that the China is mainly using coal to power its industry. A better world for all indeed.

New report highlights climate footprint of electric car battery production

In the quest for greater mileage per charge, electric car batteries are getting much bigger. But since battery production is energy consuming and to some extent cancels out climate benefit, it is vital that production becomes more energy efficient and that the use of fossil electricity is...

www.ivl.se

Are electric vehicles really so climate friendly?

EVs produce more CO2 than say diesel – it’s just they emit via the power plant not the exhaust pipe

www.theguardian.com

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

With Blackouts, California's Electric Car Owners Are Finding New Ways To Charge Up

Nearly half of all the electric cars in the country are owned in California. But the recent wildfires and power outages are inspiring some drivers to use their cars to power their homes.

www.npr.org

Children as young as seven mining cobalt used in smartphones, says Amnesty

Amnesty International says it has traced cobalt used in batteries for household brands to mines in DRC, where children work in life-threatening conditions

www.theguardian.com

These are concerns only if we couldn't see improvements on the engines, but they doubled their capacity in the recent few years thanks to technology. If more companies will be interested in developing those (which we also see) the costs will be lower and there is ton of potential in the field. You can also supply those extra electricity needs by windmills and nuclear power, which have other issues, but they aren't releasing CO2 into our atmosphere. There is the potential and this World Championship status means more prideful companies will want to compete in that.

 

[miatachan]

2)
Stop the car and battery swapping and write the rule book around a longer race formula (full GP length or even something like 2+ hours) and force teams to fast charge the cars.

they dont swap cars anymore

 

[jonelsorel]

These are concerns only if we couldn't see improvements on the engines, but they doubled their capacity in the recent few years thanks to technology. If more companies will be interested in developing those (which we also see) the costs will be lower and there is ton of potential in the field. You can also supply those extra electricity needs by windmills and nuclear power, which have other issues, but they aren't releasing CO2 into our atmosphere. There is the potential and this World Championship status means more prideful companies will want to compete in that.

Do you listen to yourself as you think other people's thoughts often?

"Nuclear has other issues, but thank it's not releasing CO2", plant food? And we have to "pick the lesser evil", right? Sounds familiar. I thought they were keen on cutting CO2 for the wellbeing of the planet. Greenhouse owners actually buy CO2 generators to accelerate plant growth. If there isn't enough in the atmosphere, plants die off by themselves; if there is a lot, they grow, expand and use it. Go figure. Tempest in a teapot used to limit and control human movement more than ever, and people applaud it as progress.

Human Activity in China and India Dominates the Greening of Earth, NASA Study Shows - NASA

The world is literally a greener place than it was 20 years ago, and data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of this new

www.nasa.gov

 

[Dobermann92]

Do you listen to yourself as you think other people's thoughts often?

"Nuclear has other issues, but thank it's not releasing CO2", plant food? And we have to "pick the lesser evil", right? Sounds familiar. I thought they were keen on cutting CO2 for the wellbeing of the planet. Greenhouse owners actually buy CO2 generators to accelerate plant growth. If there isn't enough in the atmosphere, plants die off by themselves; if there is a lot, they grow, expand and use it. Go figure. Tempest in a teapot used to limit and control human movement more than ever, and people applaud it as progress.

Human Activity in China and India Dominates the Greening of Earth, NASA Study Shows - NASA

The world is literally a greener place than it was 20 years ago, and data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of this new

www.nasa.gov

So you think CO2 is good for the enviroment or for us in general? Do you know that in India and China the biggest cities are filled with smog almost every day caused by human activity and those people suffer from it?

Smog in northern China rises in first four months of 2019

Environment ministry says clean air efforts will not be relaxed in response to problems facing economy, but campaign group Greenpeace says local authorities have disposed of restrictions on industry.

www.scmp.com

New Delhi is choking on smog and there's no end in sight | CNN

Residents of India's capital are set to suffer record-levels of smog for at least a week, even as the local government puts in place emergency measures to try and tackle New Delhi's heavily polluted air.

edition.cnn.com

There are people who think that we should stop using nuclear power, but that has the best efficiency of all of the powerplants and while it has some waste problem regarding to used fuel rods, it doesn't produce CO2.

Greenhouses are closed systems, in which you only have to care about plants, plants like CO2, but animals and humans don't. Not only that but we release so much CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere, where plants cannot really access it.

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This is a worldwide problem, it isn't a specific limit on individuals, it is a limit on companies, but we have to take countermeasures to prevent global warming, where the sea levels rise and the lands turn into desert.

(This post isn't payed by the shadow government)

 

[Nevini]

All this talk about C02, has bugger all to do with motorsport on this forum.
The only world wide solution is population culling, everything else is pointless.
Everyone who in concerned please be first in the que.

Can we please move on and enjoy motorsport ;-)

 

[Durge Driven]

"With generation three in 2020-21 could come four-wheel drive, possibly 450 to 500 kilowatts.
That's what fascinates me."

Toto Wolff

Now imagine 10 years Gen 4-5
Eventually they will beat all ICE records ...even 1/4 mile ...may take 50 years but they will do it

If you ask me the youngsters of today and future will have a more exciting motor sports life then I did
At races or home, mega pixel VR Gen 20....... pick your cockpit or any position, race control if you want
All the while multi-tasking a dozen other things