Filling a gas-powered vehicle can still be cheaper than charging an electric one

AZjeff

$50 Site Donor 2022
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
7,005
Location
in Az where the Deer and Antelope play
Depends on how you drive. If the Rivian towing uphill is what you do, the amount of range they calculated is based on towing a load uphill. Going downhill will not get them all back due to the aerodynamic loss a trailer towing pickup is horrible at.

A prius prime or other EV will likely get back quite a lot if they are aerodynamic and didn't waste too much energy in the heat going uphill.

Forgive me but I don't understand your answer. The 4 miles of range regenerated wasn't calculated, it was taken from the dash display of range at the top of the downhill and at the bottom. I also don't understand what aero loss has to do with going down a long steep grade that needs brakes to maintain speed in any vehicle.

I understand the concept of regenerative braking but maybe not the application I guess. It makes sense to me that that steeper the grade the more energy can be generated to put back in the battery at a given speed but maybe that's not the case? I think they thought the same, a heavy truck with a heavy load going down a steep hill should regenerate lots of electricity. Maybe it actually did.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
863
Location
Long Island,nassau county NY
Well, if we get "plenty", how come the price is sky rocketing? Supply and demand. We don't have enough supply to keep the price down. The Keystone pipeline will provide 800,000 more barrels per day to the U.S., and, the $ we pay for the oil stays on the North American Continent making all of us more prosperous.
Sadly that oil from that pipeline was for export only so irrelevant
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
863
Location
Long Island,nassau county NY
They are not using them because they require permitting and permits are being held up. Bureaucratic red tape is being used to slow walk the production of energy. 14 month phenomenon, I guess.
There not using them because the oil companies are making crazy profit. Why add more gasoline to the system when all it does is lower there profit. Government doesn't control energy corporate America does
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
Forgive me but I don't understand your answer. The 4 miles of range regenerated wasn't calculated, it was taken from the dash display of range at the top of the downhill and at the bottom. I also don't understand what aero loss has to do with going down a long steep grade that needs brakes to maintain speed in any vehicle.

I understand the concept of regenerative braking but maybe not the application I guess. It makes sense to me that that steeper the grade the more energy can be generated to put back in the battery at a given speed but maybe that's not the case? I think they thought the same, a heavy truck with a heavy load going down a steep hill should regenerate lots of electricity. Maybe it actually did.
It's the heat. The battery gets hot going up the hill, which limits its discharge rate, but this same thing works against it going down the hill because now that the pack is hot, the recharge rate is also extremely limited, so not much actual regeneration took place.
 
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
61
Location
Illinois
i can agree until you get to the "money grab ............eviiro disaster part. The oil would be used here because we are no longer energy independent. The XL is 95+ complete and there ain't no disaster, ..........except that about 10,000 workers lost their 100,000 dollar jobs and we now have to import dirty oil from our enemies.
Then XL is less than 10% complete, requires ~7B to complete and crosses the Ogallala aquifer........
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,328
Location
Silicon Valley
Forgive me but I don't understand your answer. The 4 miles of range regenerated wasn't calculated, it was taken from the dash display of range at the top of the downhill and at the bottom. I also don't understand what aero loss has to do with going down a long steep grade that needs brakes to maintain speed in any vehicle.

I understand the concept of regenerative braking but maybe not the application I guess. It makes sense to me that that steeper the grade the more energy can be generated to put back in the battery at a given speed but maybe that's not the case? I think they thought the same, a heavy truck with a heavy load going down a steep hill should regenerate lots of electricity. Maybe it actually did.
It's the heat. The battery gets hot going up the hill, which limits its discharge rate, but this same thing works against it going down the hill because now that the pack is hot, the recharge rate is also extremely limited, so not much actual regeneration took place.

Before we factor in the battery, the "aero loss" is completely based on speed and drag alone. People have been testing towing capacity with a flat wall on a trailer as a "load" at speed despite the insignificant weight. Don't forget the laws of physics: what is in motion stays in motion, and therefore the mass (weight) doesn't matter if you are not accelerating (engine power or battery drain) or decelerating (braking for normal vehicle, regen for hybrid and EV) on a flat land.

Regarding to weight on up/down hill driving and regen, the energy you used going up hill is mass x gravity x height and downhill you need to capture it all back to the battery. If they are the same speed going up vs down (unlikely), then the amount of power going in is the same as going out. If they go down hill faster than they go up hill, regen would be charging the battery up faster than they were drained. If the converter circuit cannot charge fast enough they have to use the brake to slow the car down, just like hybrid with a small battery does. I suspect that's the reason for the 4 mile range.

Going down a steep hill therefore is actually worse for the truck than a shallow one over the same height.
 

FZ1

Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
5,870
Location
Texas
Sadly that oil from that pipeline was for export only so irrelevant
Why do you think that? Do you think each barrel of oil has "Export Only" stamped on it's forehead as it's streaming down the pipe line? Oil from Canada is to be used where needed. Right now we need to use this oil in the U.S.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
Before we factor in the battery, the "aero loss" is completely based on speed and drag alone. People have been testing towing capacity with a flat wall on a trailer as a "load" at speed despite the insignificant weight. Don't forget the laws of physics: what is in motion stays in motion, and therefore the mass (weight) doesn't matter if you are not accelerating (engine power or battery drain) or decelerating (braking for normal vehicle, regen for hybrid and EV) on a flat land.

Regarding to weight on up/down hill driving and regen, the energy you used going up hill is mass x gravity x height and downhill you need to capture it all back to the battery. If they are the same speed going up vs down (unlikely), then the amount of power going in is the same as going out. If they go down hill faster than they go up hill, regen would be charging the battery up faster than they were drained. If the converter circuit cannot charge fast enough they have to use the brake to slow the car down, just like hybrid with a small battery does. I suspect that's the reason for the 4 mile range.

Going down a steep hill therefore is actually worse for the truck than a shallow one over the same height.
I understand that, but in this specific example (the Rivian), from what I recall, the limiting factor in why so little energy was recuperated via regen was due to thermal limits on the battery, which then limited recharge rate.

Uphill, the truck consumed 21.44kWh, regen put back 2.7kWh.

This observation is supported by the poor charge rate at the EA station once the unit hit 40% SoC.

I expect this vehicle, if it is going to be used as a truck, needs better battery cooling.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
972
Location
VA
You can already get very small solar panels, the problem is that the density of panels is limited, so you can only harvest so many watts per meter squared or per square foot. On top of that, as you alluded to, the further north you go, the less solar exposure you get. This is a 44MW commercial solar farm with trackers here in Ontario:

View attachment 92194

Rooftop is ~12% or less.
Those panels use sun trackers, driven by electric motors. I'm assuming they don't factor in the consumption of the trackers into their power production figures
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
Those panels use sun trackers, driven by electric motors. I'm assuming they don't factor in the consumption of the trackers into their power production figures
If the power is pulled from behind the export transformer, it should be factored in, it depends on where the power is metered from.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,328
Location
Silicon Valley
I understand that, but in this specific example (the Rivian), from what I recall, the limiting factor in why so little energy was recuperated via regen was due to thermal limits on the battery, which then limited recharge rate.

Uphill, the truck consumed 21.44kWh, regen put back 2.7kWh.

This observation is supported by the poor charge rate at the EA station once the unit hit 40% SoC.

I expect this vehicle, if it is going to be used as a truck, needs better battery cooling.
Seems like they use a different circuit to do the "conversion" in each direction. I though they should be bi-directional but guess I learn something new everyday.
 

FZ1

Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
5,870
Location
Texas
Then XL is less than 10% complete, requires ~7B to complete and crosses the Ogallala aquifer........
I think your number is correct. In any case, the XL can be completed in about 12 months and should be completed. Had construction not been stopped 14 months ago we would be close to having this oil available now.
 

FZ1

Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
5,870
Location
Texas
There not using them because the oil companies are making crazy profit. Why add more gasoline to the system when all it does is lower there profit. Government doesn't control energy corporate America does
Govt. doesn't control energy????? Well, uh, who do you think shut down the XL 14 months ago??
There not using them because the oil companies are making crazy profit. Why add more gasoline to the system when all it does is lower there profit. Government doesn't control energy corporate America does
Can't agree. You are asking us to believe that at $100 per barrel oil producers don't wanna pump more, sell more, and make more Billions a day?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
24,075
Location
...
Then XL is less than 10% complete, requires ~7B to complete and crosses the Ogallala aquifer........


There is a risk factor for everything. The alternative to a pipeline would be train or trucks. If the pipeline is underwater then ships are the alternative.

A lot of people live right over a pipeline or close to one. They don’t even know it.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
863
Location
Long Island,nassau county NY
Govt. doesn't control energy????? Well, uh, who do you think shut down the XL 14 months ago??

Can't agree. You are asking us to believe that at $100 per barrel oil producers don't wanna pump more, sell more, and make more Billions a day?
Stock price has spiked because the price of oil. Corporate America likes high prices
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220312-155740.jpg
    Screenshot_20220312-155740.jpg
    53.3 KB · Views: 6
Top