View Single Post
Old 07-12-2017, 01:57 PM   #23 (permalink)
redpoint5
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,813

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 25.55 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 23.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,563
Thanked 3,067 Times in 2,282 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vskid3 View Post
But does it have to, or are we just seeing an early adopter premium added on until the chargers get more regular use?

I think it makes more sense to have most EVs going around with 30-40kwh batteries and plenty of places to charge for those occasional trips than to haul around a 60+kwh battery just in case you want to make a trip (which you'll still probably need to charge on any decent trip anyway). It's because of the lack of chargers that a larger battery is needed or wanted to help with reducing range anxiety.
Perhaps fast charging costs are at a premium due to how new they are, but they do cost more than L2 chargers. Not only do they cost more to build (1-time cost), but they also have to pay demand charges, which are an additional monthly cost in addition to the amount of electricity consumed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
Why do you need inductive charging for busses at all? Do it the way busses (and trains) in many European cities have been for years: A pantograph connects to overhead power wires. If you have fixed routes, you don't even need batteries; otherwise you just charge at stops.
I was just thinking that it's more likely we get overhead power lines that our cars connect to than inductive charging.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote