Quote:
Originally Posted by IamIan
Traditional usage .. has been used for wind turbine powertrains , water wheel powertrains , etc .. (gas tank), (exhaust system), etc.. assumptions are not part of the accepted/conventional usage of the terminology .. Just like if someone says 'wheel' .. they are not talking about the 'shaft' that may or may not be attached to the wheel .. even if the 'shaft' could be part of the system.
It's not a big deal .. just making your own person changes to word definitions.
And .. When do you include all the horribly low efficiency , high weight, large volume, long time, steps it takes for that gasoline solar energy storage system ? ... After all we have these steps included for the PV+Battery solar energy storage system.
You probably have a very good chance to get more yearly kwh from the solar panels that way .. although you would than be throwing away almost all the solar energy hitting the car's surface .. And probably not enough weight saved on vehicle to gain another battery string.
Also keep in mind .. The solar panels on the car itself are a crucial part of it's marketing .. without them on the car .. they are just another BEV .. it is the amount of solar energy harvest that is integrated into the car that allows it to even have a tiny chance to stand out and distinguish itself from other BEVs. |
Ok, a few things about my personal changes to defintions.
1) I think you have a very good point about that.
I bristle when I hear the word "industry" associated with banking or insurance - WTF?
2) OTOH, makers of ICE powered vehicles have lots of ways to alter certain specifications to their favor. I just installed a new motor in a Toyota 4runner. There's a few large containers of fluids that need to be recycled - motor oil, transmission ATF, cooling water, power steering, fluid. You'd be surprised how much oil a AT actually holds when you completely drain it and then drop the pan to change the filter. About 2X the amount required than an "oil change." Then engine also required about 50% more than an "oil change."
3) It's not exactly clear what "dry weight" is, because I've seen different uses of the term. For example, I was recently looking into purchasing a 1968 Triumph GT-6. There were several different weight specs involved - where "dry weight" was actually dry - no oil, coolant or fuel. Then there was an intermediate - no fuel, then there was a "ready to go" weight.
4) Not including the weight of the gas can be pretty large amount of weight - say 15 gallons X 6 pounds/gallon = 90 lbs. That's NOT SPLITTING HAIRS. That is nearly the weight of one of the 50kW motor/gearboxes I'm using to power my car.
In fact, here are some #'s from ICE parts I've taken off my Mitsubishi Eclipse:
Gas tank itself is about 29 lbs.
The evaporative emmisions stuff associated with just STORING FUEL is about 10lbs.
Exhaust system (exhaust pipe, muffler, catalytic converter): 45lbs
Radiator: 17lbs
Intercooler: 7lbs
rear driveshaft: 35lbs
rear differential: 66lbs
This does not include all the random hoses, etc involved but we are at 209lbs!!
That's the weight of TWO MORE MGR's! In other words, the stuff that auto industry would like to have people ignore when it comes to weight easily total the weight of 3 power units that can put out 50kW each! 150kW for FREE! (weight wise
)
Notice that I didn't include the weight of the motor/transmission - that can easily account for the battery weight.
In other words, if someone wants to compare the weight of an ICE car with a BEV car, they need to accurately evaluate everything involved. Usually people include the motor, transmission and battery for the BEV. If they merely include the engine and transmission for a FWD car, they will be off by quite a bit.
If the "traditional" usage is more accurately "powertrain" then fine - I'll use it. It would be nice if one word could be used to describe all this.
Regarding the steps in the fuel system - I couldn't agree more.
Here's another example of the ICE/oil complanies ignoring part of the problem. It would be great to find a way to include all the energy involved in pumping crude oil, transporting it, refining it, then tranporting the fuel to the gas station. While ICE proponents are very quick to point out stuff like "coal powered EV's or the carbon footprint of solar panels, they are very quite about the energy/pollution involved with petroleum products.
I honestly fully support efforts to make a vehicle light. I think automakers have gone far into "bloatware" and vehicles would significantly benefit from well thought out weight reduction. There's certainly room to take advantage of the EV drivetrain in making a lightweight vehicle in a nice lightwight design. For example, using the battery box as a structural part of the vehicle chassis like the EV-1. Using a carbon fiber tube frame chassis isn't taking advantage of these possiblilites, it's merely using a new material in an old way.
However, it's probably their marketing hype that bugs me most. Solar "infinite" range.
Claims that the vehicle will handle like a sports car when powered with a 40kW motor, riding on skinny solar racer tires.
I don't think they're going to get people to cough up $300,000 for a sporty car that can barely keep up with a Miata on a straight road.