by "Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
Published 11/17/2017 at 23:42
by "Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
Published 11/17/2017 at 23:42
No Tags
STARS: 0
What the fuck is Tesla doing?
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
With electric Semi-trucks looking very much like the next big talk of the internet, have people actually thought about a little known fact: vehicles are staying longer on the road , some fleet trucks slightly more than 20 years!
But the thing is, and I know this is like what anti-electric people say: Batteries loose their capacity over time and while in a model S a 50-75 mile of range loss over 10 or 20 years of usage might just be how shit is, for a fleet owner that is absolutely unacceptable because you can’t have your six digit truck losing its ability to move over time. If Tesla doesn’t replace the batteries on-demand and for free, the depreciation curve on those trucks is going to be insane!
It is true that diesel trucks also lose horsepower over time due to wear and that fuel consumption and maintenance is an
expensive
pain in the ass,
batteries are not cheap and remain an evolving technology
. Tesla also claims that you could expect savings of up to 200,000 dollars after two years of usage, but compared to what? How is a fleet owner going to take them seriously when their webpage says “Bad ass performance?”
Yet if you’re some hipster new startups and money is no object and all you care about is the environment, what exactly would the footprint of having to change batteries, an elemental part of such vehicles, so often look like? I can see the case for electric cars where you might cover at most 300,000 miles over say 10 years of ownership and the loads aren’t insane and the battery isn’t going through a cycle every few hours.
But this is all speculation, I am not a climate scientist and I’m not an engineer (yet!). I still think that we need to think long term and invest in possibly better ways of moving.
Updating:
Apparently reusing batteries that are deemed useless for the road is completely possible as grid backups for green energy sources (wind & solar), in this state, batteries would probably last longer due to more average loads and less cycles.
Making an electric vehicle according to the UCS is about 14% more energy intensive, mind, this study was made with low capacity battery cars and it also later points out that the battery car could be almost 50% less energy intensive throughout its lifespan.
Recycling of Li-ion batteries is still in its infancy, but through different processes such as hydrometalurgy extracting lithium @ 50% efficiency and cobalt @ 25% efficiency from these batteries is possible. The study does not mention cost or enviromental damage due to the heavy acids used to carry this process out. after the hydrometalurgic process, batteries can be frozen and shredded to recover steel and copper.
"farscythe - makin da cawfee!" (farscythe)
11/17/2017 at 23:49, STARS: 4
what i want to know is what tesla thinks will happen to pallet freight if you 0 to 60 in 6 seconds....
also...fully laden....whats its 60 to 0
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/17/2017 at 23:50, STARS: 1
The semi page claims that the truck can hit 60 in about 20 seconds when laden to the 80,000 lb limit the USDOT imposes.
"farscythe - makin da cawfee!" (farscythe)
11/17/2017 at 23:54, STARS: 0
thanks.... 60 in 20 sounds safe enough
"Nibbles" (nibbles)
11/17/2017 at 23:59, STARS: 2
I’d imagine that with regenerative braking on top of what I would expect to be industry standard braking systems, it probably shuts down pretty well when asked.
"DC3 LS, will be perpetually replacing cars until the end of time" (dc3ls-)
11/18/2017 at 00:12, STARS: 4
Yeah, I think if they were being pragmatic they’d make a box truck or something. Seems like that would reap the benefits of being an EV way more than a long haul truck. Plus easier to work out servicing stations and charging infrastructure.
Or at least sort out Model 3 production first, but what do I know.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 00:14, STARS: 0
Well, I think people just went with electric and forgot about hydrogen. Yet, as I’m finding out, recycling and being electric is not such a big deal. It is kind of inefficient, but not as much as I thought
"Manwich - now Keto-Friendly" (manwich)
11/18/2017 at 00:15, STARS: 1
“what tesla thinks will happen to pallet freight if you 0 to 60 in 6 seconds....”
I have an image in my mind where the truck takes off but the pallet stays in place, floats momentarily in mid-air (like in cartoons) and then lands on the ground.
"DC3 LS, will be perpetually replacing cars until the end of time" (dc3ls-)
11/18/2017 at 00:17, STARS: 1
I hope it has a hell of a traction control system. Otherwise bobtailed Tesla trucks are going to be the new mustangs.
"facw" (facw)
11/18/2017 at 00:31, STARS: 0
One thing to consider is that while it matters today, range may not be especially important in an autonomous truck network. As long as you can calculate the remaining range, you can route the truck such that it will meet up with another freshly charged truck close to where it needs a recharge. The trailer can then be transferred with minimal delay. Obviously more range is still better, but if you have a good network, the delay and extra energy costs aren’t going to be that great if you have trucks that can no longer handle their original range.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 00:41, STARS: 0
I suppose so, but in a 1000 truck network, (after ten years lets say batteries l0ose 10% charge capacity) you’d need an additional 85 trucks (Lets say battery density improves 15% over 10 years) to maintain range capacity.
Plus, it still doesn’t handle depreciation, and companies live for slowly depreciating assets.
"CRider" (crider)
11/18/2017 at 00:54, STARS: 0
Nobody forgot about hydrogen. It’s dead because it’s so deeply flawed.
"Distraxi's idea of perfection is a Jagroen" (distraxi)
11/18/2017 at 01:14, STARS: 1
Longhaul trucks do phenomenal mileages: a million miles in 5 years isn’t uncommon, particularly for fleet-owned trucks which can run 2 or 3 shifts across multiple drivers. And life of lithium batteries is largely driven by calendar age: even with this use you’ll probably get 5+ years before range starts to pack up too badly. So even if a new battery pack costs $100k, you’re only paying 10c/mile in battery depreciation: tiny compared to your saving in diesel. Plus you make a decent saving on servicing the power train, which is not cheap for heavy diesels particularly when you consider lost income in downtime. electric power trains are largely maintenance free.
"Flynorcal: pilot, offshore sailor, car racer and panty thief" (flynorcal)
11/18/2017 at 01:31, STARS: 0
You’re missing the point.
There’s no driver.
It operates 24/7 aside while charging with no breaks, no meals, no restroom breaks, doesn’t show up drunk or high, doesn’t get “sick” because it got laid last night, doesn’t get distracted or sleepy... so there are virtually no accidents or lawsuits where the driver is at fault.
Truck drivers make a shocking amount of money. Which means they cost that. 3x the labor (8hrs of human vs 24hrs) with a flat rate purchase?
Truckers have as much future as coal miners.
On the upside there’s about a bajillion new jobs out there should one aspire to have one. Also, Tesla is going to make a fortune off of this.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 01:45, STARS: 1
I never mention the drivers in the text, I mention fleet owners, environmental costs and financial issues regarding depreciation. Additionally its not as if self-driving tech isn’t available for other types of vehicles, its not as if a version couldn’t be made for diesel truck.
But you do raise a problem for humans just there: jobs are going away shamefully. Perhaps we don’t think highly of them when they block traffic or try to overtake in a fucking uphill, but they are still humans with families that will have to either adapt to a probably worse paying job or simply resign into poverty. This topic really is really for another time.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 01:53, STARS: 0
Yeah, in the end energy density is still too low to consider it. I’m still not certain about electricity because all of the tech involved still seems far fetched and I cannot naturally trust that the recycling will be as easy as the Union of Concerned Scientists claims in their video (although they probably refer to nickel-lead batteries which are very easily recyclable), but again, they are scientists and I am not.
I think sometimes battery electric vehicles are spoken about with the same wistful ignorance that we speak about AI. We forget that improvements in battery tech is bottoming out and that the consequences of batteries have not yet been foreseen. The same way that we think AI will take over the world but in reality its simply trying to emulate us.
I simply long for the simplicity of hydrogen, I think its very elegant. But it is as you said deeply flawed.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 02:10, STARS: 0
Lithium batteries are certified on charge/discharge cycles and years. Energy density is lost on both ways and both effect significantly on performance.
I can see the savings in downtime and maintenance, what I can’t see is how Tesla expects the owner to save 200,000 dollars every two years when also claiming that when carrying cargo the cost per mile for fuel is only half of diesel’s; the Model S is more than twice as efficient as a comparable sedan.
If we look at it from a purely efficiency perspective no doubt a Tesla truck will always be more efficient because electric motors are almost 100% thermal efficient. but we need to look at the range/cargo limitations that batteries bring into the equation, not to mention that 80,000lb includes the truck and batteries are heavy.
"MrDakka" (mrdakka)
11/18/2017 at 02:14, STARS: 0
What I find interesting is that Tesla drops this news pretty much right after Fisker announces their new battery tech.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/14/fisker-has-filed-patents-for-solid-state-batteries/
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 02:20, STARS: 0
Energy density FTW! I heard about this but I couldn’t find compelling articles. I hope that the tech is more environmentally friendly and viable cost-wise.
However...
Henrik Fisker might be an excellent designer, but time and time again he has proven to be unable to carry out independent business or innovation.
"CRider" (crider)
11/18/2017 at 03:42, STARS: 0
Hydrogen cars are not simple. They are electric cars with a hydrogen fuel cell powering them and a battery used as a buffer between the fuel cell and the electric motor. Unless hydrogen production is 100% energy efficient, AND no hydrogen is lost in transport AND the hydrogen fuel cells are 100% efficient, they will always be less efficient than a battery electric car.
"Distraxi's idea of perfection is a Jagroen" (distraxi)
11/18/2017 at 03:45, STARS: 0
Age, temperature, cycles and average charge level all have an effect. Age and temperature dominate however. But I’d expect for this application it’d be cost effective to have a pretty sophisticated cooling solution, so that leaves age as the main factor.
You’re absolutely right about the payload effect though- we’ve got to be talking about several tons of batteries.
I can’t see the cost saving either. A million miles at 5mpg at $2/gal is $400k of diesel. Half of that is $200k saving, fine. But you’re not doing a million miles in 2 years - that requires almost 60mph average 24/7!
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
11/18/2017 at 04:51, STARS: 0
That’s an unusually low limit, isn’t it? It’s only 36 and a bit tonnes.
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
11/18/2017 at 04:52, STARS: 0
Regenerative braking is still acting on the same wheels though so it’s not going to make a vehicle stop any better.
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
11/18/2017 at 04:56, STARS: 0
But there is a driver.
Unmanned trucks (that is trucks that can drive on any road at any time by themselves, not just in very limited circumstances) are much further away than some people seem to think.
"SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media" (silentbutnotreallydeadly)
11/18/2017 at 05:30, STARS: 1
All this suggests to me is that long haul trucks will become even more like planes. The frame will live for decades but the engine and fuel source will change as required.
What really got me about Tesla’s truck in the one up driver. In Oz, intercontinental trips often run two up so they can each do their driving shift and the stood down driver can either sleep or ride on the passenger side.
Regardless, for this to work outside North America or Europe...lots is going to have to change. And Tesla is going to have to pay for it.
"Tekamul" (tekamulburner)
11/18/2017 at 08:36, STARS: 0
If there’s no driver, it’s a moot point because they’re still 10 years away, and Tesla will change drastically if they survive that long.
"jimz" (jimz)
11/18/2017 at 09:01, STARS: 2
trucks stay in service a lot longer than 20 years, chief.
see, the thing is, even with hundreds of thousands of miles, they’re easy to overhaul. the engines are pretty much all straight-6s with wet cylinder liners, and you can do a total engine rebuild without taking the engine out of the truck.
cripes, I still occasionally see trucks running around with 2-stroke Detroits, and those have been off the market pretty much since the ‘80s.
"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
11/18/2017 at 09:10, STARS: 0
I thought so! But through research I couldn’t find that number out.
Im sure there’s a statistic that show’s how semis stay up to 40 years or so in service.... I just wish I could find it! It would definitely be bad news for the semi!