On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 17:28:04 +0100, Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>
> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.

There isn't enough Lithium. We're going back to horses.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
>
> EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day

No wonder it costs so much to transport things.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:45:50 +0100, Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 2:14:28 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off. In a 30 minute break, charging can restore some 70-80% of the initial range. Call it 75%, so 11 hours of driving can extend to 175% of the initial range. 11 hr x 65 mph = 715 miles requires a vehicle range of over 400 miles. That's not a stretch in any way. Tesla is planning 300 and 500 mile versions. I can't tell you the weight of those batteries, but Tesla is saying they will not have to give up significantly on the payload capacity, "less than 1 ton", according to Musk.
>
> We can only guess. Current Tesla battery is around 1/2 ton for vehicle weight of 3 to 4 tons. A fully loaded semi could weight 20 to 25 tons. I think it would be several tons of batteries.

I'd love to see that short out.

You know when you could buy Li Ion cells with protection? Whatever happened to that?

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:42:10 +0100, Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>>
>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>
> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.

There's no reason you can't do that with cars. The underside of a car is pretty much the same for every model.

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
>
> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz..dk wrote:
> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
> >
> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
>
> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.

Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
>>
>> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
>> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
>> >
>> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
>>
>> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
>
> Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.

We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang....@fonz.dk> wrote:
> >>
> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
> >> >
> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
> >>
> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
> >
> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.

LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 18/04/2022 23.49, Ricky wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:38:16 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 18.47, Ed Lee wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 07:52:26 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> That is using power that is not waste power... maybe? In discussions this has always been treated as consuming battery power, but the Tesla batteries are cooled as well as heated. This might be done by simply reducing the cooling. However, the fact that this is not enabled when your arrival charge level is below 20% implies it uses active heating. Yes, I'm sure this is the case, because there is no difference between the optimal temperature while driving and the optimal charging temperature. So when navigating to a charger, the battery will supply power to heat the battery if it is colder than optimal.
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> The Tesla Model 3/Y is unusual in that it doesn't actually have a battery heater.
>>>>
>>>> The batteries can take heat from the motor cooling loop and if more heat is needed the motor controller operates the motor in an inefficient way to dissipate more power.
>>>>
>>>> It takes as much power to do it that way but reduces cost by avoiding the need for adding a resistive heater to the battery as most (all?) other EVs do.
>>>
>>> I believe the heater is only on when temp drop to -20C or so, which probably never happen in the west coast. As far as cost is concerned, it's about the same as the fifth seat heater.
>> I have seen it active many times, and also when ambient temperatures are
>> 20 degrees.
>>
>> See plot of lifetime vs temperature here:
>>
>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay-Lee-27/publication/260030309/figure/download/fig2/AS:296997371301891@1447821099785/Lithium-ion-battery-life-vs-temperature-and-charging-rate-36-39-44-45.png
>>
>> ESR:
>>
>> https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.0c9f4e352906f965c5327221f6d49854?rik=KR97DtfMdiFdaQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.avdweb.nl%2fArticle_files%2fSolarbike%2fBatteries%2fLiFePO4-internal-resistance-versus-temperature.jpg&ehk=NHkwR3Qn%2bfG2QGCx8OagT20WqS3Cyb6azCKOMcvKkEs%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0&sres=1&sresct=1
>>
>> The point is that during charging you add say 60kW of energy. If you can
>> increase the efficiency during charging that then looses less heat than
>> used for warming the battery, you both save energy and prolong the life
>> of the battery
>
> If that is the case, the error in logic is that you need to warm the battery prior to charging. The battery would be warmed sufficiently while charging by the waste heat without using additional heat.
>

If you charge the battery without preheat, the temperature due to higher
ESR in the beginning is not uniform (has not spread out), so you wont
get the benefit. When the car prepares the charging, it does so at least
20 minutes before start of charge
> In the Tesla, the battery is warmed at the expense of otherwise useful energy, because it shortens the charging time. Time connected to the charger is considered a "precious" commodity since they are expensive units and there are only so many.
>
> Where did you get your data? The graph doesn't even say what type of battery it is for.
>

I just randomly looked up Lithium Ion data. They are the same
technology, so should be comparable to the Tesla battery

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 23.49, Ricky wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:38:16 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> >> On 18/04/2022 18.47, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 07:52:26 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>>> ...
> >>>>> That is using power that is not waste power... maybe? In discussions this has always been treated as consuming battery power, but the Tesla batteries are cooled as well as heated. This might be done by simply reducing the cooling. However, the fact that this is not enabled when your arrival charge level is below 20% implies it uses active heating. Yes, I'm sure this is the case, because there is no difference between the optimal temperature while driving and the optimal charging temperature. So when navigating to a charger, the battery will supply power to heat the battery if it is colder than optimal.
> >>>> ...
> >>>>
> >>>> The Tesla Model 3/Y is unusual in that it doesn't actually have a battery heater.
> >>>>
> >>>> The batteries can take heat from the motor cooling loop and if more heat is needed the motor controller operates the motor in an inefficient way to dissipate more power.
> >>>>
> >>>> It takes as much power to do it that way but reduces cost by avoiding the need for adding a resistive heater to the battery as most (all?) other EVs do.
> >>>
> >>> I believe the heater is only on when temp drop to -20C or so, which probably never happen in the west coast. As far as cost is concerned, it's about the same as the fifth seat heater.
> >> I have seen it active many times, and also when ambient temperatures are
> >> 20 degrees.
> >>
> >> See plot of lifetime vs temperature here:
> >>
> >> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay-Lee-27/publication/260030309/figure/download/fig2/AS:296997371301891@1447821099785/Lithium-ion-battery-life-vs-temperature-and-charging-rate-36-39-44-45.png
> >>
> >> ESR:
> >>
> >> https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.0c9f4e352906f965c5327221f6d49854?rik=KR97DtfMdiFdaQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.avdweb.nl%2fArticle_files%2fSolarbike%2fBatteries%2fLiFePO4-internal-resistance-versus-temperature.jpg&ehk=NHkwR3Qn%2bfG2QGCx8OagT20WqS3Cyb6azCKOMcvKkEs%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0&sres=1&sresct=1
> >>
> >> The point is that during charging you add say 60kW of energy. If you can
> >> increase the efficiency during charging that then looses less heat than
> >> used for warming the battery, you both save energy and prolong the life
> >> of the battery
> >
> > If that is the case, the error in logic is that you need to warm the battery prior to charging. The battery would be warmed sufficiently while charging by the waste heat without using additional heat.
> >
> If you charge the battery without preheat, the temperature due to higher
> ESR in the beginning is not uniform (has not spread out), so you wont
> get the benefit.

Sorry, why is it not spread out? Every cell has ESR. What is not uniform?

> When the car prepares the charging, it does so at least
> 20 minutes before start of charge

Ok.???

> > In the Tesla, the battery is warmed at the expense of otherwise useful energy, because it shortens the charging time. Time connected to the charger is considered a "precious" commodity since they are expensive units and there are only so many.
> >
> > Where did you get your data? The graph doesn't even say what type of battery it is for.
> >
> I just randomly looked up Lithium Ion data. They are the same
> technology, so should be comparable to the Tesla battery

There are different lithium ion batteries. The internal resistance graph is for LiFePO4 which is a less often used battery type I believe. The curves will not be the same for the cobalt nickle batteries more often used. I'm not sure they all have the same curve for wear over temperature which is the curve with no description.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 19/04/2022 01.50, Ricky wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 23.49, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:38:16 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
>>>> On 18/04/2022 18.47, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 07:52:26 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> That is using power that is not waste power... maybe? In discussions this has always been treated as consuming battery power, but the Tesla batteries are cooled as well as heated. This might be done by simply reducing the cooling. However, the fact that this is not enabled when your arrival charge level is below 20% implies it uses active heating. Yes, I'm sure this is the case, because there is no difference between the optimal temperature while driving and the optimal charging temperature. So when navigating to a charger, the battery will supply power to heat the battery if it is colder than optimal.
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Tesla Model 3/Y is unusual in that it doesn't actually have a battery heater.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The batteries can take heat from the motor cooling loop and if more heat is needed the motor controller operates the motor in an inefficient way to dissipate more power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It takes as much power to do it that way but reduces cost by avoiding the need for adding a resistive heater to the battery as most (all?) other EVs do.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the heater is only on when temp drop to -20C or so, which probably never happen in the west coast. As far as cost is concerned, it's about the same as the fifth seat heater.
>>>> I have seen it active many times, and also when ambient temperatures are
>>>> 20 degrees.
>>>>
>>>> See plot of lifetime vs temperature here:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay-Lee-27/publication/260030309/figure/download/fig2/AS:296997371301891@1447821099785/Lithium-ion-battery-life-vs-temperature-and-charging-rate-36-39-44-45.png
>>>>
>>>> ESR:
>>>>
>>>> https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.0c9f4e352906f965c5327221f6d49854?rik=KR97DtfMdiFdaQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.avdweb.nl%2fArticle_files%2fSolarbike%2fBatteries%2fLiFePO4-internal-resistance-versus-temperature.jpg&ehk=NHkwR3Qn%2bfG2QGCx8OagT20WqS3Cyb6azCKOMcvKkEs%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0&sres=1&sresct=1
>>>>
>>>> The point is that during charging you add say 60kW of energy. If you can
>>>> increase the efficiency during charging that then looses less heat than
>>>> used for warming the battery, you both save energy and prolong the life
>>>> of the battery
>>>
>>> If that is the case, the error in logic is that you need to warm the battery prior to charging. The battery would be warmed sufficiently while charging by the waste heat without using additional heat.
>>>
>> If you charge the battery without preheat, the temperature due to higher
>> ESR in the beginning is not uniform (has not spread out), so you wont
>> get the benefit.
>
> Sorry, why is it not spread out? Every cell has ESR. What is not uniform?
>
>

Thermal time constant

>> When the car prepares the charging, it does so at least
>> 20 minutes before start of charge
>
> Ok.???
>
>
>>> In the Tesla, the battery is warmed at the expense of otherwise useful energy, because it shortens the charging time. Time connected to the charger is considered a "precious" commodity since they are expensive units and there are only so many.
>>>
>>> Where did you get your data? The graph doesn't even say what type of battery it is for.
>>>
>> I just randomly looked up Lithium Ion data. They are the same
>> technology, so should be comparable to the Tesla battery
>
> There are different lithium ion batteries. The internal resistance graph is for LiFePO4 which is a less often used battery type I believe. The curves will not be the same for the cobalt nickle batteries more often used. I'm not sure they all have the same curve for wear over temperature which is the curve with no description.
>

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:38:03 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> On 19/04/2022 01.50, Ricky wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> >> On 18/04/2022 23.49, Ricky wrote:
> >>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:38:16 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> >>>> On 18/04/2022 18.47, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 07:52:26 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>> That is using power that is not waste power... maybe? In discussions this has always been treated as consuming battery power, but the Tesla batteries are cooled as well as heated. This might be done by simply reducing the cooling. However, the fact that this is not enabled when your arrival charge level is below 20% implies it uses active heating. Yes, I'm sure this is the case, because there is no difference between the optimal temperature while driving and the optimal charging temperature. So when navigating to a charger, the battery will supply power to heat the battery if it is colder than optimal.
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Tesla Model 3/Y is unusual in that it doesn't actually have a battery heater.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The batteries can take heat from the motor cooling loop and if more heat is needed the motor controller operates the motor in an inefficient way to dissipate more power.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It takes as much power to do it that way but reduces cost by avoiding the need for adding a resistive heater to the battery as most (all?) other EVs do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I believe the heater is only on when temp drop to -20C or so, which probably never happen in the west coast. As far as cost is concerned, it's about the same as the fifth seat heater.
> >>>> I have seen it active many times, and also when ambient temperatures are
> >>>> 20 degrees.
> >>>>
> >>>> See plot of lifetime vs temperature here:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay-Lee-27/publication/260030309/figure/download/fig2/AS:296997371301891@1447821099785/Lithium-ion-battery-life-vs-temperature-and-charging-rate-36-39-44-45.png
> >>>>
> >>>> ESR:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.0c9f4e352906f965c5327221f6d49854?rik=KR97DtfMdiFdaQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.avdweb.nl%2fArticle_files%2fSolarbike%2fBatteries%2fLiFePO4-internal-resistance-versus-temperature.jpg&ehk=NHkwR3Qn%2bfG2QGCx8OagT20WqS3Cyb6azCKOMcvKkEs%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0&sres=1&sresct=1
> >>>>
> >>>> The point is that during charging you add say 60kW of energy. If you can
> >>>> increase the efficiency during charging that then looses less heat than
> >>>> used for warming the battery, you both save energy and prolong the life
> >>>> of the battery
> >>>
> >>> If that is the case, the error in logic is that you need to warm the battery prior to charging. The battery would be warmed sufficiently while charging by the waste heat without using additional heat.
> >>>
> >> If you charge the battery without preheat, the temperature due to higher
> >> ESR in the beginning is not uniform (has not spread out), so you wont
> >> get the benefit.
> >
> > Sorry, why is it not spread out? Every cell has ESR. What is not uniform?
> >
> >
> Thermal time constant

You seem to be thinking the heat is not internal, but external, like sitting in the hot sun. Or I'm completely not understanding what you are saying. The heat generated from using the battery will be from every cell. So every cell has the same thermal time constant and very well matched temperatures. It would be externally supplied heat that might be less uniform.

What am I not getting?

--

Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 1:25:35 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 11:51:19 AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:38:03 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> > > On 19/04/2022 01.50, Ricky wrote:
> > > > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> > > >> On 18/04/2022 23.49, Ricky wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:38:16 PM UTC-4, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
> > > >>>> On 18/04/2022 18.47, Ed Lee wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns..com wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 07:52:26 UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > > Thermal time constant.
> >
> > You seem to be thinking the heat is not internal, but external, like sitting in the hot sun. Or I'm completely not understanding what you are saying. The heat generated from using the battery will be from every cell. So every cell has the same thermal time constant and very well matched temperatures. It would be externally supplied heat that might be less uniform.
> >
> > What am I not getting?
> The cells at the centre of the battery pack have longer thermal time constant than the cells at the surface - they have a higher thermal resistance to ambient, even if the heat capacity of each cell (temperature rise per joule dissipated) is the same (which it ought to be).

Ambient??? What ambient??? These cell are all cooled/heated by water flowing past them. Ambient has very little to do with this when driving the car.

Oh, and the "center" of the pack is of little consequence, since all the cells are adjacent to "ambient" at the ends since they are only stacked one high.

They cool or warm all night, so by morning they are pretty uniform. They are heated INTERNALLY from the current flowing through them in use. Each cell receives the same amount of heat from use. There is very little, if any, gradient of temperature.

> The cells in the centre of the battery will get hotter than the cells on the surface. Since this will lower their ESR it makes the whole calculation even more complicated, because they won't be dissipating as much heat once the core of the battery has warmed up.

No, the cells in the center of the pack do not get hotter. If there is significant temperature differences, the battery pack gets unbalanced and it impacts the performance and life of the cells. There is virtually no extra cooling/heating at the periphery compared to the cooling/heating from the water flowing through the battery pack. Tesla did a great job designing their batteries and this is an important aspect they did a great job on.

Oddly enough, it's the UI they seem to have whacked.

--

Rick C.

-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
>> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
>> >> >
>> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
>> >>
>> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
>> >
>> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
>> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
>
> LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.

And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
> >> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang....@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo..
> >> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
> >> >>
> >> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
> >> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
> >
> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?

That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.

The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways. Heck, even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.

BTW, people *are* animals and mostly do need to be treated as such. I guess you didn't pass biology, eh?

The fact that you are not aware of any of this, speaks volumes about your judgement.

--

Rick C.

-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
>> >> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> >> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> >> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> >> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> >> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> >> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> >> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
>> >> >
>> >> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
>> >> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
>> >
>> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
>> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?
>
> That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.

Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there's a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn't waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.

And it's been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.

You also don't understand Libertarianism, it's not a free for all you can murder folk, it's about removing rules from things where we don't need them.

> The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.

No, you shouldn't assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that's not on the tachograph.

> Heck, even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.

If I want to work in a sweatshop I should be allowed to do so. If I don't like the conditions, I'm free to leave. I'm not chained up am I?

> BTW, people *are* animals and mostly do need to be treated as such. I guess you didn't pass biology, eh?

Your pedantry isn't helping this discussion. Our brains function nothing like them. A dog for example will react to something on emotion, and attack. We think first.

> The fact that you are not aware of any of this, speaks volumes about your judgement.

Repetition of the above ignored.

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> >> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >> >> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> >> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> >> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> >> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
> >> >> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
> >> >
> >> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
> >> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?
> >
> > That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.
> Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there's a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn't waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.
>
> And it's been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.

And for some reason, people like you fail to understand that is WITH laws. Without laws about speeding the numbers would be much worse. But it doesn't surprise me you think this way. If nothing, you are consistent.

> You also don't understand Libertarianism, it's not a free for all you can murder folk, it's about removing rules from things where we don't need them.

You had not mentioned Libertarianism until now. Why did you bring it up? I've not been discussing it.

> > The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.
> No, you shouldn't assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that's not on the tachograph.

Unfortunately, once they have the crash and kill someone, it's too late. Laws are to prevent harm. Enforcement is too late, but the threat of enforcement is what gives the laws an impact. Otherwise they are just recommendations.

A trucker doesn't need to sleep after driving for the max time. He just has to stop driving and do something else. Talking about playing football is just being silly, but again, consistent for you.

They don't assume anyone will crash without a break. They *know* it will happen to some, too many. Those laws were passed and are enforced to prevent history from repeating.

> > Heck, even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.
> If I want to work in a sweatshop I should be allowed to do so. If I don't like the conditions, I'm free to leave. I'm not chained up am I?

If you wish to work in a sweat shop, please do so. It will need to be in another country to be legal, but I'm ok with you leaving here. But, again, you think everything is about you. There are plenty of people who don't want to work in those conditions. If they are legal, it will be hard to find better work. So others *won't* have a choice.

> > BTW, people *are* animals and mostly do need to be treated as such. I guess you didn't pass biology, eh?
> Your pedantry isn't helping this discussion. Our brains function nothing like them. A dog for example will react to something on emotion, and attack.. We think first.

LOL! Nearly everything you say is emotion. It has been shown time and time again that humans are bags of emotion tied up with little, tiny strings of thought. That's why so many were manipulated by Trmp.

> > The fact that you are not aware of any of this, speaks volumes about your judgement.
> Repetition of the above ignored.

Exactly! You love proving me right, don't you?

--

Rick C.

-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
>> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> >> >> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> >> >> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> >> >> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> >> >> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> >> >> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
>> >> >> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
>> >> >
>> >> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
>> >> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?
>> >
>> > That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.
>> Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there's a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn't waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.
>>
>> And it's been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.
>
> And for some reason, people like you fail to understand that is WITH laws. Without laws about speeding the numbers would be much worse. But it doesn't surprise me you think this way. If nothing, you are consistent.

People speed if they want to, the ones that stick to the limit do so because they think it's the right thing to do, not because it's the law.

And think about my 4% again. Do you know hoe many people speed? Again, a government stat - a third. So even if everyone sped, that would make it 12% of accidents caused by speeding, the rest by morons doing something stupid.

>> You also don't understand Libertarianism, it's not a free for all you can murder folk, it's about removing rules from things where we don't need them.
>
> You had not mentioned Libertarianism until now. Why did you bring it up? I've not been discussing it.

That's the name of what we're discussing you ignoranus.

>> > The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.
>> No, you shouldn't assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that's not on the tachograph.
>
> Unfortunately, once they have the crash and kill someone, it's too late. Laws are to prevent harm. Enforcement is too late, but the threat of enforcement is what gives the laws an impact. Otherwise they are just recommendations.

Stop being such a pansy.

This way would work far batter - instead of getting an insurance premium rise when you cause a crash, no matter how minor, get points on your license. X number of crashes and you're off.

> A trucker doesn't need to sleep after driving for the max time. He just has to stop driving and do something else. Talking about playing football is just being silly, but again, consistent for you.

You really are stupid, do you seriously think using your brain for something else is a rest?!

> They don't assume anyone will crash without a break. They *know* it will happen to some, too many. Those laws were passed and are enforced to prevent history from repeating.

They assume because it happens to some it happens to all. I might crash because I didn't get any sleep last night, well before my break time. Only taking account of driving time is insanity.

>> > Heck, even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.
>> If I want to work in a sweatshop I should be allowed to do so. If I don't like the conditions, I'm free to leave. I'm not chained up am I?
>
> If you wish to work in a sweat shop, please do so. It will need to be in another country to be legal, but I'm ok with you leaving here. But, again, you think everything is about you. There are plenty of people who don't want to work in those conditions.

I never said they had to did I?

> If they are legal, it will be hard to find better work. So others *won't* have a choice.

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4:36:11 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:53:36 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:39:02 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:23:33 +0100, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 23.14.28 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
> >> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:28:09 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang....@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> >> >> >> >> > > More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> >> >> >> >> > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> >> >> >> >> Drivers can only be on duty for 8 hours before being required to take a 30-minute break. They can only drive for 11 hours total before having to take a much longer time off.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > EU rules are more restrictive, a minimum of 45 minutes rest every 4.5 hours and a maximum of 9 hours driving per day
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> No wonder it costs so much to transport things.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Yeah, we don't need safe drivers. We need cheap, disposable drivers.
> >> >> >> We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
> >> >> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?
> >> >
> >> > That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.
> >> Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there's a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn't waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.
> >>
> >> And it's been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.
> >
> > And for some reason, people like you fail to understand that is WITH laws. Without laws about speeding the numbers would be much worse. But it doesn't surprise me you think this way. If nothing, you are consistent.
> People speed if they want to, the ones that stick to the limit do so because they think it's the right thing to do, not because it's the law.

You live in a very simple world. Most people, or even nearly all people speed. I've only ever met one person who does not speed at all. But how much they speed is set by the speed limit. If there were no speed limits I have no doubt there would be much higher speeds on many roads, especially highways. People who are happy keeping their speed under 70 because of the risk of getting a ticket would drive at 75 and 80, mostly because others would as well. With no speed limit, those who stick to the speed limit would drive at some arbitrary speed.

There is no justification to say speed limits do not serve to reduce speeds and accidents on highways.

> And think about my 4% again. Do you know hoe many people speed? Again, a government stat - a third. So even if everyone sped, that would make it 12% of accidents caused by speeding, the rest by morons doing something stupid..

I don't know how they came up with a 33% number. Drive the speed limit on a highway and you had better be in the right lane or you risk getting rear ended. Even in the right lane, you will have people riding up your bumper and you will catch up with no one. You will catch up with very few even at a few miles over the speed limit.

> >> You also don't understand Libertarianism, it's not a free for all you can murder folk, it's about removing rules from things where we don't need them.
> >
> > You had not mentioned Libertarianism until now. Why did you bring it up? I've not been discussing it.
> That's the name of what we're discussing you ignoranus.

No, that's the name of what YOU are discussing now, but not what you proposed previously. I'm talking about your proposal to have no laws. That doesn't have a name, even if it deserves one.

Here is a definition of libertarianism, "libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others." That's what we have today in the US. Those who disagree, such as yourself, simply disagree on the extent of appropriate laws, that's all.

"We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke."

"And the rules create more problems than they solve."

I don't see any limitation to your proposal. That's a very, very extreme version of libertarianism, if it is that at all. Sounds more like chaos to me.

> >> > The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.
> >> No, you shouldn't assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that's not on the tachograph..
> >
> > Unfortunately, once they have the crash and kill someone, it's too late.. Laws are to prevent harm. Enforcement is too late, but the threat of enforcement is what gives the laws an impact. Otherwise they are just recommendations.
> Stop being such a pansy.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 23:39:52 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4:36:11 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver's licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there's you.
>> >> >> And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don't need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn't cause harm. Don't you trust yourself to behave?
>> >> >
>> >> > That's where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.
>> >> Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there's a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn't waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.
>> >>
>> >> And it's been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.
>> >
>> > And for some reason, people like you fail to understand that is WITH laws. Without laws about speeding the numbers would be much worse. But it doesn't surprise me you think this way. If nothing, you are consistent.
>> People speed if they want to, the ones that stick to the limit do so because they think it's the right thing to do, not because it's the law.
>
> You live in a very simple world. Most people, or even nearly all people speed. I've only ever met one person who does not speed at all. But how much they speed is set by the speed limit. If there were no speed limits I have no doubt there would be much higher speeds on many roads, especially highways. People who are happy keeping their speed under 70 because of the risk of getting a ticket would drive at 75 and 80, mostly because others would as well. With no speed limit, those who stick to the speed limit would drive at some arbitrary speed.
>
> There is no justification to say speed limits do not serve to reduce speeds and accidents on highways.

Bullshit. There are loads of people who never speed. I know many of them, they believe it's morally wrong and unsafe to do so. And I'm always stuck behind the buggers.

If I think there are no pigs about, I drive at the speed I consider safe. If I think there's a risk of being nicked, I go within 10mph of the limit.

>> And think about my 4% again. Do you know hoe many people speed? Again, a government stat - a third. So even if everyone sped, that would make it 12% of accidents caused by speeding, the rest by morons doing something stupid.
>
> I don't know how they came up with a 33% number.

I do, they put hidden speed cameras (which didn't get anyone a ticket) on many roads and counted how many broke the limit.

> Drive the speed limit on a highway and you had better be in the right lane or you risk getting rear ended. Even in the right lane, you will have people riding up your bumper and you will catch up with no one. You will catch up with very few even at a few miles over the speed limit.

You'll catch up with trucks. I wish I lived where you do. On a motorway here, more people stick to the limit than speed, and there are actually quite a lot that go under (WTF?) the limit.

I (despite there being limits) go as fast as the car permits. Haven't been done for a decade.

>> >> You also don't understand Libertarianism, it's not a free for all you can murder folk, it's about removing rules from things where we don't need them.
>> >
>> > You had not mentioned Libertarianism until now. Why did you bring it up? I've not been discussing it.
>> That's the name of what we're discussing you ignoranus.
>
> No, that's the name of what YOU are discussing now, but not what you proposed previously. I'm talking about your proposal to have no laws. That doesn't have a name, even if it deserves one.

It does, it's Libertarianism. They want to do away with 95% of laws, look it up.

> Here is a definition of libertarianism, "libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others." That's what we have today in the US. Those who disagree, such as yourself, simply disagree on the extent of appropriate laws, that's all.

Libertarianism in the UK would do away with equal rights for a start. That's a pathetic law. The only two laws needed are damage to people and damage to property. So basically murder, assault, theft.

> "We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke."
>
> "And the rules create more problems than they solve."
>
> I don't see any limitation to your proposal. That's a very, very extreme version of libertarianism, if it is that at all. Sounds more like chaos to me.

Why are you so keen on Authoritarianism? We are adults, not kids in kindergarten.

>> >> > The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.
>> >> No, you shouldn't assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that's not on the tachograph.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, once they have the crash and kill someone, it's too late. Laws are to prevent harm. Enforcement is too late, but the threat of enforcement is what gives the laws an impact. Otherwise they are just recommendations.
>> Stop being such a pansy.
>
> That is a convincing argument. The "pansy" philosophy.

It is, it's high time we took back the world from the sissies who want everything to be safe.

>> This way would work far batter - instead of getting an insurance premium rise when you cause a crash, no matter how minor, get points on your license. X number of crashes and you're off.
>
> You simply are unable to understand anything I've said, eh?

What do you believe I've misunderstood?

>> > A trucker doesn't need to sleep after driving for the max time. He just has to stop driving and do something else. Talking about playing football is just being silly, but again, consistent for you.
>> You really are stupid, do you seriously think using your brain for something else is a rest?!
>
> Absolutely. We rest by doing things that do not use the same thought paths or the same muscles. Playing cards can be relaxing, or chess. They involve thought, but not the same sort as being an air traffic controller, so appropriate for a break. Driving in mentally fatiguing, not so much physically. So do something else that uses a different part of your brain. That is very relaxing and refreshing.

Bullshit. I can relax from driving by weightlifting, but I cannot relax by playing chess, both use the brain.

>> > They don't assume anyone will crash without a break. They *know* it will happen to some, too many. Those laws were passed and are enforced to prevent history from repeating.
>> They assume because it happens to some it happens to all. I might crash because I didn't get any sleep last night, well before my break time. Only taking account of driving time is insanity.
>
> No, there's no such assumption. The point is to prevent the few accidents by imposing reasonable requirements.

But it doesn't work. They make invalid assumptions based on fucked up statistics. Which is why we still have many accidents.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 23:39:52 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4:36:11 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Heck,

The word is hell. Or are you a religious nut?

>> >> even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.
>> >> If I want to work in a sweatshop I should be allowed to do so. If I don't like the conditions, I'm free to leave. I'm not chained up am I?
>> >
>> > If you wish to work in a sweat shop, please do so. It will need to be in another country to be legal, but I'm ok with you leaving here. But, again, you think everything is about you. There are plenty of people who don't want to work in those conditions.
>> I never said they had to did I?
>
> I'm saying they have to because of the economic results. Please read what I wrote, it's all there. If you don't understand, ask a friend to help you read it with comprehension.

I'm saying the law is wrong. Why prevent people from doing cheap labour if that's all they're able to do? Please read what I wrote, it's all there. If you're going to poke fun at me, make sure you're not doing the same thing yourself.

>> > If they are legal, it will be hard to find better work. So others *won't* have a choice.
>> If you're good enough to get better work, you do so. If you're not good enough, it's better to work in a sweat shop than be unemployed.
>
> Hmmm... there's a glimmer of understanding, but not enough to actually, get it. Ok, we'll leave this one since you are having so much trouble with it. Maybe this can be your post graduate work.

I notice you have no reasoning available for your viewpoint.

>> >> > BTW, people *are* animals and mostly do need to be treated as such. I guess you didn't pass biology, eh?
>> >> Your pedantry isn't helping this discussion. Our brains function nothing like them. A dog for example will react to something on emotion, and attack. We think first.
>> >
>> > LOL! Nearly everything you say is emotion. It has been shown time and time again that humans are bags of emotion tied up with little, tiny strings of thought.
>> No it hasn't. Compare us to animals as I suggested.
>
> I just did, but your emotional thinking got in the way of understanding.

You did no such comparison, you just made the OCD comment that humans are animals.

>> > That's why so many were manipulated by Trmp.
>> Wow, completely backwards train of thought on your part. The emotional ones are the lefties. Those who think with logic are right wing. You're the touchy feely type that think it's ok to steal my taxes to pay for your problems.
>
> Lol. I guess that's why Trmp

Why would you shorten a 5 letter word to a 4 letter word?

> has to use rallies to rile up his voters, to appeal to their intellect with rational and thoughtful discussions like, "Lock her up!" LOL You are a trip. But this is getting old. Bill likes to let people wind themselves up, but it's not terribly entertaining for me. I was just wondering what ridiculous arguments you might come up with and they are doozies! They don't take much effort to swat down though, so not really entertaining other than in an AFV way.

Ah, so you're a left wing theiving liberal that thinks it's ok for my taxes to pay for your problems.

>> >> > The fact that you are not aware of any of this, speaks volumes about your judgement.
>> >> Repetition of the above ignored.
>> >
>> > Exactly! You love proving me right, don't you?
>> Are you fucking stupid or what? All I said here is you're saying the same thing twice, therefore there's no point in me answering it again. That is all, stop reading anything else into it.
>
> LOL Ok, I'll stop. A friend worked for a government contractor. Another worker was briefing an Admiral, one on one, and at a point the Admiral got up and said he was leaving, but the guy should complete the briefing. The guy continued the briefing until it was complete.
>
> I'm leaving now. Please complete the briefing.

Stop trying to sound smart, it doesn't befit you.

And don't reply to everything then leave, that's the ultimate in childish behaviour.

On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 5:27:52 AM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 23:39:52 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4:36:11 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Heck,
>
> The word is hell. Or are you a religious nut?

No, I said exactly what I meant. Why do you think you need to change what other people say to suit your preferences? That's very egotistical.

> >> >> even factory workers get mandatory breaks by law. Without laws requiring some level of consideration of the workers, we would still have the sweatshops and child labor conditions of a hundred years ago.
> >> >> If I want to work in a sweatshop I should be allowed to do so. If I don't like the conditions, I'm free to leave. I'm not chained up am I?
> >> >
> >> > If you wish to work in a sweat shop, please do so. It will need to be in another country to be legal, but I'm ok with you leaving here. But, again, you think everything is about you. There are plenty of people who don't want to work in those conditions.
> >> I never said they had to did I?
> >
> > I'm saying they have to because of the economic results. Please read what I wrote, it's all there. If you don't understand, ask a friend to help you read it with comprehension.
> I'm saying the law is wrong. Why prevent people from doing cheap labour if that's all they're able to do? Please read what I wrote, it's all there. If you're going to poke fun at me, make sure you're not doing the same thing yourself.

I know exactly what you are saying, but you ignored what I wrote. You still don't understand that. Most likely you will *never* understand what I wrote, as is the issue that prevents you from having useful exchanges with many people.

> >> > If they are legal, it will be hard to find better work. So others *won't* have a choice.
> >> If you're good enough to get better work, you do so. If you're not good enough, it's better to work in a sweat shop than be unemployed.
> >
> > Hmmm... there's a glimmer of understanding, but not enough to actually, get it. Ok, we'll leave this one since you are having so much trouble with it. Maybe this can be your post graduate work.
> I notice you have no reasoning available for your viewpoint.

I have explained it. You fail to understand. You seem to think that all jobs will be available to suit anyone looking for work. If you work for substandard wages, that eliminates jobs utilizing the same skills which pay better. A person doesn't have the choice of taking a job that is not available. As a society, we feel it is in *everyone's* interest for *everyone* to be paid a decent wage.

If you wish to work for lower wages, please take the job that pays better, and then donate the unneeded money to a charity. Don't deprive others of a living wage by undercutting everyone else and driving wages so low, it is hard to survive. We live in a society where we all impact one another if you think so or not.

> >> >> > BTW, people *are* animals and mostly do need to be treated as such. I guess you didn't pass biology, eh?
> >> >> Your pedantry isn't helping this discussion. Our brains function nothing like them. A dog for example will react to something on emotion, and attack. We think first.
> >> >
> >> > LOL! Nearly everything you say is emotion. It has been shown time and time again that humans are bags of emotion tied up with little, tiny strings of thought.
> >> No it hasn't. Compare us to animals as I suggested.
> >
> > I just did, but your emotional thinking got in the way of understanding..
> You did no such comparison, you just made the OCD comment that humans are animals.

If that's all you read in my posts, there is literally no point in discussing anything with you.

> >> > That's why so many were manipulated by Trmp.
> >> Wow, completely backwards train of thought on your part. The emotional ones are the lefties. Those who think with logic are right wing. You're the touchy feely type that think it's ok to steal my taxes to pay for your problems.
> >
> > Lol. I guess that's why Trmp
> Why would you shorten a 5 letter word to a 4 letter word?

I spell it as is appropriate. I suppose I could just say "it".

> > has to use rallies to rile up his voters, to appeal to their intellect with rational and thoughtful discussions like, "Lock her up!" LOL You are a trip. But this is getting old. Bill likes to let people wind themselves up, but it's not terribly entertaining for me. I was just wondering what ridiculous arguments you might come up with and they are doozies! They don't take much effort to swat down though, so not really entertaining other than in an AFV way.
> Ah, so you're a left wing theiving liberal that thinks it's ok for my taxes to pay for your problems.

Yes, that's what it's all about. YOUR TAXES. Ok, fine. Let's abolish taxes, all taxes. How can you say some tax spending is justified, but not others that YOU don't like? Taxes are decided by the method we in the USA have selected as our form of government. Are you anti-government?

> >> >> > The fact that you are not aware of any of this, speaks volumes about your judgement.
> >> >> Repetition of the above ignored.
> >> >
> >> > Exactly! You love proving me right, don't you?
> >> Are you fucking stupid or what? All I said here is you're saying the same thing twice, therefore there's no point in me answering it again. That is all, stop reading anything else into it.
> >
> > LOL Ok, I'll stop. A friend worked for a government contractor. Another worker was briefing an Admiral, one on one, and at a point the Admiral got up and said he was leaving, but the guy should complete the briefing. The guy continued the briefing until it was complete.
> >
> > I'm leaving now. Please complete the briefing.
> Stop trying to sound smart, it doesn't befit you.
>
> And don't reply to everything then leave, that's the ultimate in childish behaviour.

Ok, are you happy now?

You aren't actually discussing anything. At this point I can't distinguish you from some sort of strange bot. Why would I want to continue to discuss something with a bot?

I actually got a spam call the other day where I was not sure if it was a bot or not? I guess at some point, the programs get so smart that they equal or surpass the apparent intelligence of the typical person who is hired to make such calls. They certainly have the language down better.

So, I guess you win. :-P

--

Rick C.

+--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 7:25:43 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 4:32:21 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 8:57:35 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:09 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 12:59:46 PM UTC-7, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> > > > > Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > > > >> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > > >> > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > > > >> > > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > > > > >> > > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > > > > >> > > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> > > > > >> > For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> > > > > >> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> > > > > 18 motors for an "18 wheeler" makes no sense at all. Look at the axle
> > > > > configuration for truck. It also makes no sense to try to add power to
> > > > > trailers where eight of the tires are.
> > > >
> > > > Lithium batteries don't perform well in the cold, which trucks have to deal with. At -20 C the capacity is about 75%; at -40 C it is less than half. So those Tesla semis operating during the wintertime could see their range reduced to under 150/250 miles (depending upon the version). Of course, they could insulate the batteries and use a part of their energy to heat themselves (which would also reduce range).
> > > The capacity you are talking about seems to be the capacity of the battery to deliver current, which does decline at low temperatures, rather than the energy stored in the battery which is what determines range, and doesn't decline in lithium batteries.
> > >
> > > As usual, you don't seem to know what you are talking about.
> > >
> > > Once a battery is delivering power, it is also warming itself up. Think internal resistance. As soon as you have got the truck moving, the power available to keep it moving will immediately increase. Using some of the power stored in the battery to warm it up might be necessary, if the truck needed lots of power to get moving at all, but that doesn't seem to be an actual problem.
> > >
> > > Keeping the battery warm while you are recharging it does seem to be necessary, but it isn't going to use up much power or energy, and will have zero effect on range.
> >
> > No, YOU don't know what you are talking about. Lithium capacity AND current drop with temperature, Sloman - LOOK IT UP!
>
> As Rick C has also pointed out, this is known and has been measured. He seems to think that physical chemistry comes into this, and Gibbs free energy does depend on temperature, but not much.
>
> https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=80512
>
> The paper he cites blames it all on the battery impedance changes, which means that when the battery self heats in operation, the effect goes away
> > Using ANY energy of the battery for heating WILL effect range, idiot.
> But not much, You are a simple-minded idiot who can't do quantitative thinking, which does lead you to make moronic blanket claims, and to ignore what's actually going on.

"Not by much" Is that a scientific term, SNIPPERMAN, like "a tad bit" or "just a shade"?

Actual testing shows a significant drop in range: 59% in -33 C temperatures..
https://insideevs.com/news/498554/tesla-model-3-range-extreme-cold/

EV's quoted range isn't a realistic usable figure. First, Tesla recommends using only 80% of battery capacity (10% to 90%), so reduce it by 20%. Secondly, range is estimated based on slower than highway speeds, 55mph or 80kph, and is reduced when you drive faster.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEYPKjVUtFcaK2V1gecDx9g
Thirdly, range doesn't factor in headwinds; all us pilots are acutely aware of the effect of wind on range, but your nonpilots aren't. Fourthly, range is further reduced by using the heater or air conditioner. Finally, prudent people keep a reserve for emergencies, like having to take a detour or finding that your supercharger is out of service. Pilots are required to have a 30 min reserve (45 min for IFR flights). If you don't go below 10% this could be part of your reserve, but not all. Factor all of these things together and your winter range in Canada won't get you between superchargers - not even close. Oh, I forgot to mention that the battery capacity also declines with age.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman. Sydney

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 3:11:05 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> Factor all of these things together and your winter range in Canada won't get you between superchargers - not even close. Oh, I forgot to mention that the battery capacity also declines with age.

I'm glad I don't live in Canada.

Yeah, I see diminished range in the winter. It's nothing like you describe.. Canada is a bit of a special case since some huge percentage of the people live within 100 miles or so of the US border. So it's mostly not really different from US driving and there are no Superchargers over 90% of the country. Where they do exist, they are typically not more than 100 miles apart. There has been no time when I can't drive 100 miles from one charger to the next.

BTW, you should not include the 80% charge limit in your calculations since that's not a real limit. The point is the battery wears faster at the higher end, so it's not a great idea to charge to 100% every time you charge. But if you needed to reach a destination, then by all means charge the battery up as high as needed. It's no different from stepping on the gas pedal in an ICE vehicle and dropping down a gear or two. That wears the motor faster, but unless you do it all the time, it is inconsequential.

I've discussed the minor impacts on range with other Tesla owners and I still am not convinced it is significant. I drove the same pickup for 20 years and hardly ever saw the mileage change more than ±5%. It is claimed you need to factor in rain, wind, even sunshine as it heats the road. I think that is all nonsense for 99.9% of driving. An airplane is moving much faster than a car. Wind resistance impacts mileage as the square of speed.. So it's very different at 70 vs. 200 or 300 mph. The winds are also much stronger higher in the atmosphere.

So try to be a bit realistic. People drive BEVs and they work. Larkin is in complete denial about them. Some of your concerns are real, but you exaggerate them quite a bit.

I find it is the people who don't have BEVs that express the most concern about driving them.

--

Rick C.

+--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 2:32:38 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 3:11:05 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> > Factor all of these things together and your winter range in Canada won't get you between superchargers - not even close. Oh, I forgot to mention that the battery capacity also declines with age.
> I'm glad I don't live in Canada.
>
> Yeah, I see diminished range in the winter. It's nothing like you describe. Canada is a bit of a special case since some huge percentage of the people live within 100 miles or so of the US border. So it's mostly not really different from US driving and there are no Superchargers over 90% of the country. Where they do exist, they are typically not more than 100 miles apart. There has been no time when I can't drive 100 miles from one charger to the next.
>
> BTW, you should not include the 80% charge limit in your calculations since that's not a real limit. The point is the battery wears faster at the higher end, so it's not a great idea to charge to 100% every time you charge. But if you needed to reach a destination, then by all means charge the battery up as high as needed. It's no different from stepping on the gas pedal in an ICE vehicle and dropping down a gear or two. That wears the motor faster, but unless you do it all the time, it is inconsequential.
>
> I've discussed the minor impacts on range with other Tesla owners and I still am not convinced it is significant. I drove the same pickup for 20 years and hardly ever saw the mileage change more than ±5%. It is claimed you need to factor in rain, wind, even sunshine as it heats the road. I think that is all nonsense for 99.9% of driving. An airplane is moving much faster than a car. Wind resistance impacts mileage as the square of speed. So it's very different at 70 vs. 200 or 300 mph. The winds are also much stronger higher in the atmosphere.
>
> So try to be a bit realistic. People drive BEVs and they work. Larkin is in complete denial about them. Some of your concerns are real, but you exaggerate them quite a bit.
>
> I find it is the people who don't have BEVs that express the most concern about driving them.
>
> --
>
> Rick C.
>
> +--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
> +--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

I was being realistic and quoted actual measured conditions - you did not. Cars are not airplanes, which are designed for the speeds at which they fly: higher car speeds DO effect power consumption and Tesla's software factors that in. You can drive at 55mph (which is necessary to get the listed range), but it will take you longer.

Another factor that I didn't mention is that the cold in winter requires the Tesla's battery to use its heater, consuming 5-10% of the charge. Warming the car before leaving can use another 5%, so you are down 15% before even leaving the parking lot.

On Sunday, May 1, 2022 at 1:10:30 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 2:32:38 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 3:11:05 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> > > Factor all of these things together and your winter range in Canada won't get you between superchargers - not even close. Oh, I forgot to mention that the battery capacity also declines with age.
> > I'm glad I don't live in Canada.
> >
> > Yeah, I see diminished range in the winter. It's nothing like you describe. Canada is a bit of a special case since some huge percentage of the people live within 100 miles or so of the US border. So it's mostly not really different from US driving and there are no Superchargers over 90% of the country. Where they do exist, they are typically not more than 100 miles apart. There has been no time when I can't drive 100 miles from one charger to the next.
> >
> > BTW, you should not include the 80% charge limit in your calculations since that's not a real limit. The point is the battery wears faster at the higher end, so it's not a great idea to charge to 100% every time you charge. But if you needed to reach a destination, then by all means charge the battery up as high as needed. It's no different from stepping on the gas pedal in an ICE vehicle and dropping down a gear or two. That wears the motor faster, but unless you do it all the time, it is inconsequential.
> >
> > I've discussed the minor impacts on range with other Tesla owners and I still am not convinced it is significant. I drove the same pickup for 20 years and hardly ever saw the mileage change more than ±5%. It is claimed you need to factor in rain, wind, even sunshine as it heats the road. I think that is all nonsense for 99.9% of driving. An airplane is moving much faster than a car. Wind resistance impacts mileage as the square of speed. So it's very different at 70 vs. 200 or 300 mph. The winds are also much stronger higher in the atmosphere.
> >
> > So try to be a bit realistic. People drive BEVs and they work. Larkin is in complete denial about them. Some of your concerns are real, but you exaggerate them quite a bit.
> >
> > I find it is the people who don't have BEVs that express the most concern about driving them.
> >
> I was being realistic and quoted actual measured conditions - you did not.. Cars are not airplanes, which are designed for the speeds at which they fly: higher car speeds DO effect power consumption and Tesla's software factors that in. You can drive at 55mph (which is necessary to get the listed range), but it will take you longer.
>
> Another factor that I didn't mention is that the cold in winter requires the Tesla's battery to use its heater, consuming 5-10% of the charge. Warming the car before leaving can use another 5%, so you are down 15% before even leaving the parking lot.

Yes, you used numbers, erroneous numbers, made up numbers, irrelevant numbers. I've explained to you some of your errors. Do you not learn from your mistakes? You also failed to show your math. So you get a D-. Sorry, but you should pay better attention in class.

You are just being silly about your statement of not being able to drive 100 miles between Superchargers. Please show some references that agree with you. Try talking about this in the Tesla forums. They will give you a good education.

--

Rick C.

+-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209