From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 03:17:31 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.174250.1@vax.sonoma.edu> oberland@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.201142.3390@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
>> The battery life isn't measured in miles, it's measured in charge/discharge
>> cycles. Good NiCads or NiMH batteries are good for between 200-500 charge
>> discharge cycles if they aren't abused by overcharging or excess current
>> draws or by being discharged excessively. Now NiCads have a self-discharge
>> rate of about 10% per week, NiMH is similar, so it's a matter of use it
>> or lose it. 5k miles a year is a daily average of 13.7 miles or about 14%
>> of the battery capacity. You don't want to discharge the battery to less
>> than 20% capacity to preserve it's life. Therefore you have to recharge
>> every 6 days. Now 200*6 is 1200 days or 3.25 years. Or looking at it
>> another way, the batteries will last about 16,250 miles between replacements.
>
>I have a Ni-cad in my hand that says it is good for 500-1000 recharges
>From what I have read, Ni-H have almost double Ni-Cad recharginglifetimes.
>200 recharges seems to be REALLY poor performance. what are you using?

The cycle life of small handheld batteries and larger traction batteries
aren't the same. The stresses on traction batteries are much higher and
the chemical changes in the high current demand cells aren't as easily
reversed. Lead acid does much better, with up to a 1000 cycles, but NiCads
are more finicky. 

>Ni-H should get a car going to 200+ miles(they can do 200 + in Ni-cad)
>
>SHOOT. I may just get one that gets 200 miles off of Ni-Cads and realllly
>save myself a ton of money.
>
>I figure the way I drive, I would recharge them about every 10-12 days.
>I would not buy a car that got less that 200 mile range
>
>Are you sure you aren't adding wrong?
>I put 100 miles a week on my car AT MOST.
> 
>I get, recharging every 10 days, 37 recharges a year.  37*8=296 charges.

200 mile range is excessive. The prototypes now being tested, such as
the GM Electrovan and Impact, are getting closer to 100 miles between
charges in actual service. I based the recharge calculation on 100
miles range.

>I see NO problem getting 40K out of them.
>In fact, using the 500 figure and 10 days, I getupwards of 60K
>IF I can strech it to once every 2 weeks, It works out to more like 30
>per year.

Don't forget to include the self-discharge rate of the batteries.

>> Speculation. You're still postulating a $30,000 car with the performance
>> of a $6,995 Escort. The money you save buying the cheaper car will more
>> than pay for any maintenance or gasoline you might consume over it's
>> lifetime. Those $20,000 batteries would buy 14,815 gallons of gas that
>> would carry a 40 MPG Escort 592,600 miles. Yet you'll have to replace
>> the batteries every 16,250 miles.
>
>two notes:1:prices of gas are going to be near 2.00 a gallon in four years.
>2:Other than slickness and performance, there is little real difference between
>a 10-12k econobox(they are getting expensive) and a 16-20K luxury car
>(actually, a "average" car)  That esdort also will set you back more like
>9-10K by the time you add in enough options to make it a decent car to compete
>with the EV.
>In 4 years, expect that escort to cost more.

$2 a gallon gas may come in the next four years, but it's a politically
unpopular idea and may not happen. $2 a gallon gas has been projected
as just around the corner since the 1970s. There's no economic reason
for gas to be higher, and the political will to raise the gas tax that
high doesn't seem to exist.

People have been paying higher prices for cars, but most of us in less
affluent circumstances won't tolerate paying more for a car than we paid
for our houses. There's a break point at about $10 a day that creates
high buyer resistance. That's why many cars are now bought on a 5 year
instead of 3 year financing plan. Paying more than $300 a month in car
payments isn't easy to sell, and 10 year financing isn't going to catch
on in a culture that wants a new car every few years. That break point
has been moving up with inflation during the past 20 years, but inflation
is practically gone now and I expect car prices to remain stable for a
few years.

>???  I said 6K MORE .  I seriously doubt that in 4 years batteries
>will cost that much.  If I did a home-brew conversion I could prpbably 
>save big $$$.  As one person pointed out, they got Ni-Cads for under $1
>at that rate, 20K of D_cells(accuming you could FIT them in the car)
>would generate 60v@1600-2000AH.   Since he got the cells for .85 each,
>I figure the auto-makers could get them for about .50 each.  Is 3500AH
>enough for a car?  And that is just Ni-cads off the shelf.
>
>(could someone figure out what that 320 mile car uses in terms of
>power, per mile, and compare?)

That price for NiCads is the *surplus* price and won't hold if demand
increases enough to dry up surplus supply. Also, 2000 AH is only 2 kWH
and it takes 22.5 kW to propell a Mazda RX-7, the car with the current
best drag, at 65 MPH on level ground with no wind. Since that's not
real world driving because it doesn't allow for wind, hills, acceleration,
or the additional weight of the batteries the practical figure is higher 
still. Even taking that idealized figure, your battery pack will only 
propell the Mazda for 7 miles before it's exhausted. For a 200 mile
range, you have to take a lower top speed, say 30 MPH, which in the
Mazda requires 8.6 kW. Then over the 7 hours needed to do 200 miles
you will have consumed about 60 kWH of energy, or 30 times the capacity
of your proposed D cell pack. You really need to double that figure for
real world conditions.

>>>200miles in avg commuter car would take 5 gallons of gas.  multiply times 
>>>250 for 50K miles*2/gallon=2500 dollars for gas.  Recharging my EV would
>>>not cost anywhere NEAR 10 dollars for 200 miles.

A gallon of gas is equivalent to 345.74 kWH. That assumes perfect conversion
of heat to mechanical energy of course. Practical IC engines are about 23%
efficient at the conversion so a gallon of gas can actually deliver about
79.5 kWH. That's still remarkabbly better than any battery. A gallon of
gas weighs about 7 pounds. 5 gallons of gas is equivalent to 397.5 kWH
which at $.11 a kWH is $43.73 or about $8.75 a gallon equivalent. If the
EV cost no more to purchase than a gas powered car, it still wouldn't
be cost competitive unless gas was $8.75 a gallon.

[NOTE THAT ALL THESE FIGURES ARE IN THE ARCHIVES FROM THE PREVIOUS
EV DISCUSSION AND ARE FULLY BACKED BY REFERENCES]

>>>I would gladly pay it up front, as I can finance it over 10 years if need 
>>>be(along with the car)
>>>My monthly costs and repair costs would be much less with an EV
>> 
>> My pickup just rolled over 100,000 miles the other day. I spend about
>> $80 a year on consumables such as air and oil filters, oil, and plugs.
>> 20,000 miles ago I spent $23 for new brake pads. And last month I
>> spent $200 on a new catalytic converter, my first major expense. So I've 
>> spent $623 on maintenance in the last 5 years. That's less than six month's 
>> *interest* on a set of $20,000 batteries.
>
>Goody for you.  Guess we all have wonder-vehicles like you do...

Seems typical to me. Most of the 21 vehicles I've owned have had similar
expenses in the first 100,000 miles. Older cars required more maintenance,
but then the parts were cheaper then too.

>Figure in 10 years maintenence.  Also, the bateries, by the time I get the car,
>would be a LOT less expensive.
>(We are talking 3-4 years from now, not tommorrow)

The price trend in automobiles and auto service has been *upward* for the
past 30 years. Why should it suddenly reverse for your convienence? At best
you should assume stable pricing for the next 4 years, and if Clinton has
his way, (Carter II), you should expect 21% inflation at the end of 4 years.

>Most things (like belts and radiators(and mufflers) are notreally based on
>mileage, but on time.  10 years of city smog is enough to pulverize most 
>belts.  10 years of rain and/or snow will kill your paint, and kill your
>muffler.  I would keep the car for 8-10 years.  The fact that I put less
>mileage on it is only to the benefit of the engine and transmission.

Well let's see, a belt is $4 for a Vee or $21 if a unitary belt. Those are
good for at least 5 years since mine is still in good shape. Today's mufflers
are either aluminized or stainless steel on decent cars and should last the
life of the car. Radiators too should last the life of the car if proper
anti-corrosive antifreeze is used and changed at the recomended intervals.
Your paint may take a beating, but wax is a wonderful protectant if applied
frequently. Anyway, no one expects a 10 year old car to look like new.

>>>It is a LOT easier to figure in 4-6K replacement cost 6-10 yrs. down the line,
>>>than it is to keep paying 1-2K a year for "routine maintenence", at times when
>>>you CAN'T budget it.  AS for the comment about investing the extra money,
>>>GET REAL.  Almost everyone finances their car, so having the extra money lying
>>>around to invest is just not going to happen.  Also, that money IF it were
>>>invested would most likely go for other things("..well, gee.. the car hasn't
>>>had any problems so far, and a new Computer would be nice...).  
>>>SHOW me 10 people who put aside 6-10k when they buy a car to pay for repairs
>>>and I will believe you.
>> 
>> Just put aside $10 a month when you make your car payment. Let it draw
>> interest. It's not a big deal. Making payments on a $30,000 car *is* a
>> big deal. The interest *alone* amounts to $150 a *month*. If you can
>> afford that, you can afford to set aside $10 a month for maintenance
>> expenses. I don't know anyone who budgets 6-10k for repairs. Hell I
>> don't know many people who would pay that much for a commuter car.
>> A 3 year old Pontiac 6000 goes for about $3,000 around here and is 
>> usually good for another 3-4 years before it needs major repair.
>> Then you dump it and buy another.
>
>10 a month?  That seems a bit low.  Also, a commuter car EV would only
>cost 12-14K or so IF prices and technology goes at thew same pace as it has,
>for the next four years.  I suspect that some company in Japan will once
>again, build a 4000 dollar car(their cost), and add in a ton of cheap
>Ni-Cads and sell it all for 12-14K.  

$10 a month is $120 a year or $600 every five years. My 5 year expense
was $623 so that's about right. Make it $11 a month so you'll have money
left over. The key to maintenance is to avoid the $50 an hour dealership
labor charge. Most maintenance on a car is simple to do yourself and $50
an hour is a good inducement to learn how. Dealership parts prices are
also at least twice aftermarket prices. For example the cat converter
I had to replace cost $495 at the dealership, but was available on the
aftermarket for $200.

>Guess we all have wonder-cars, eh?
>My parents had their computers go bad at 47K
>My trans went bad at 42K
>My computers fried at 70K
>Muffler went bad 30K, and5K
>None of the repairs were covered under warranty(read the small print)
>My car now is rusting, as the paint all but fell off at 60K(bad factory paint
>job)
>This is the LAST American car Ibuy(actually I got it from my folks for a lot
>less than it was worth)
>I would have been better off with a used toyota...
>
>stories like mine are not too uncommon.  NEW cars may have better records, but
>not old ones.  Most cars suffer horrible attrition at 7-10 years, reguardelss
>of the mileage.  Note, they say 50K *or* 5 years.  My trans went bad on year6.

There are always lemons, but with reasonable care most cars will go 100k
without major repair. I've driven 1947 Chevy pickups more miles than that
without major failures, and newer vehicles are much more reliable. It depends
very much on the driver, of course, some people can break an anvil with a
rubber mallet.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.energy