An electric car for the rich
 

Using induction charging just for looks, which is less efficient than connected charging.
Bah !

True but you don't propose that the gentry sully their hands with such common labour as plugging in do you?

How gauche.

;)

All joking aside, there is a good reason to go with induction charging:

"HaloIPT’s wireless charging systems use inductive power transfer (IPT) to transfer power over gaps of up to 400mm (15.75 inches) and are tolerant to parking misalignment with power transfer efficiencies that can match a plug-and-cable. The company is currently delivering units in the range 3 to 7kW and is also developing higher power 3-phase systems for public charging."

"The technology is designed to function beneath asphalt, and works under water or covered in ice and snow. IPT systems can be configured to work with all road-based vehicles from small city cars to heavy-goods vehicles and buses. With IPT technology embedded into roads, cars could also be charged on the move. This dynamic in-motion charging would reduce battery size requirements as well as providing charging convenience, the company suggests."


HaloIPT is a technology development company founded by Auckland UniServices (NZ) and Arup (UK).

Somebody obviously doesn't know their Wodehouse. Bertie & Jeeves always drive around in "the old two-seater" (a classic British sports car, of course), not a Rolls.

Actually I've watched Jeeves and Wooster and know they drove a pre-war Aston Martin, but I was going for a joke here, thank you for being heckler.

You're welcome. It's a thankless job, but someone needs to do it :-)

Not to mention that watching doesn't really count. The Jeeves & Bertie stories are books, so you need to read them for accurate information. IIRC, there were several models mentioned (all imaginary), including the Widgeon Seven.

Excuse me? from what I've read inductive charging can be as much as 90% efficient... using a plug and socket you have direct contact, I'm not sure if it's safe to say that a plug and socket has less then 1% loss but I think it's pretty close where inductive charging has around 10% loss or ten times the loss! sure it's not alot until you start looking at a larger scale, for every 10 cars that are charging there would enough loss that an 11th car could be charged! that is alot of lost energy, that would be like spilling a gallon of gas on the ground every time you filled up your ten gallon gas tank.

I can't say for sure but I think that when people say 'charge efficiency' it refers to the properties of the battery itself and does not depend on the charger. It is the ratio (expressed as a percentage) between the energy removed from a battery during discharge compared with the energy used during charging to restore the original capacity so maybe the "coupling efficiency" (if that's the right term) of induction and direct are not that much different. :confused: :confused: :confused:

It refers to the whole process.
Charger loss, battery heat (another loss), if you look a bit further, wired transmission losses in electricity distribution networks, ...

Adding yet another loss through radiated power transmission, is simply not acceptable.

Aside of the fact of wether or not we even want more high-powered radiation around.

Fair enough, but there's still the point that with IPT technology embedded into roads, cars could also be charged on the move.