Kia CV - 62 miles of range - charge in 4 minutes

Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
37,905
Location
NJ
I've yet to drive a EV.

unnamed (1).jpg
 
I can't wait till EVs get all the kinks worked out. It would be nice to be able to get a full charge in the time a ICE gets a full tank of fuel. I feel like we're getting close.
When that happens you don’t have to stop at some truck stop in a town you would never stop in to sit and charge. The Tesla stations are funny when you see all these expensive cars sitting at a dumpy truck stop or worse.
 
I can't wait till EVs get all the kinks worked out. It would be nice to be able to get a full charge in the time a ICE gets a full tank of fuel. I feel like we're getting close.
How so do you reckon though? My car isn't the most efficient by any means and I can completely fill the tank in 3-4 mins and have around 275-300 miles of range. Approximately how long does an EV need to charge on average to get that much range? Honestly don't know, but asking... As with any other battery type in life, faster charge rates do diminish battery quality/longevity and I've never seen that hurdle neutralized regardless of battery type. Battery technology/improvement seems to be at a snail's pace these days as only so much can be done with what we have to work with.
 
How so do you reckon though? My car isn't the most efficient by any means and I can completely fill the tank in 3-4 mins and have around 275-300 miles of range. Approximately how long does an EV need to charge on average to get that much range? Honestly don't know, but asking... As with any other battery type in life, faster charge rates do diminish battery quality/longevity and I've never seen that hurdle neutralized regardless of battery type. Battery technology/improvement seems to be at a snail's pace these days as only so much can be done with what we have to work with.


That's the biggest problem: battery technology. Someone will find a way to make batteries out of a different -ium at some point and it'll change the EV industry. I don't have the answer, I just look forward to seeing someone else find the answer. Until then, I'm driving an ICE.
 
How so do you reckon though? My car isn't the most efficient by any means and I can completely fill the tank in 3-4 mins and have around 275-300 miles of range. Approximately how long does an EV need to charge on average to get that much range? Honestly don't know, but asking... As with any other battery type in life, faster charge rates do diminish battery quality/longevity and I've never seen that hurdle neutralized regardless of battery type. Battery technology/improvement seems to be at a snail's pace these days as only so much can be done with what we have to work with.
For the most part, EV fueling is different than ICE fueling. 1st, most of us charge at home so you start every day with a "full tank" which is a great way to go. Many companies offer subsidized or even free charging at work.
On the go, you can charge to full if you have the time, but generally you charge enough to get to your destination.
Remember, Superchargers are more expensive than charging at home, especially if your electricity costs are low. I have solar panels; electricity in CA is very expensive.

While battery charging tech will continue to evolve, I doubt a 3 minute, 300 mile fill up is in the cards.
These cars are different; they are not for everyone. But if an EV works for you, you just might love one. We are very happy with our Model 3.
 
I can't wait till EVs get all the kinks worked out. It would be nice to be able to get a full charge in the time a ICE gets a full tank of fuel. I feel like we're getting close.
While that sounds nice, it's going to be verry interesting with California already having rolling blackouts BEFORE EVs come fully into the picture.
 
While that sounds nice, it's going to be verry interesting with California already having rolling blackouts BEFORE EVs come fully into the picture.

Rolling blackouts are a problem for just about every vehicle.

VERY few gas stations in Cal have back up gensets- when the power's out, so is the liquid fuel.

When they hit, whatever is in your " tank" at that time be it liquid or electron based is what you've got to live with till it passes.
 
I can't wait till EVs get all the kinks worked out. It would be nice to be able to get a full charge in the time a ICE gets a full tank of fuel. I feel like we're getting close.

We aren't getting close. The issue is the current required to deliver the energy in the time required. Moving, say, 90kWh in 2 minutes requires a charge rate of 2,700kW; 2.7MW.

Let's turn this into a gas station equivalent. My local Costco has 12 pumps, so if you were to convert that into 12x 2.7MW EV charge spots that's a potential demand of 33MW with all chargers occupied.

I have 20x gas stations locally, so if we assumed all of these were replaced with EV charge stations with an average of 8 ports, that's 22MW/station, or 432MW. That's a huge increase in demand for a 100,000 person town.

But right now the big issues are:
- Battery tolerance of high rate of charge. Currently, Tesla Supercharging has a detrimental effect on the lives of the batteries, which is why they limit its use and it's no where near the rate we are discussing.
- Interface safety - Being able to have a consumer-handleable and reliable connection that could manage that kind of current in the rain, snow....etc It's a HUGE amount of power.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JC1
We aren't getting close. The issue is the current required to deliver the energy in the time required. Moving, say, 90kWh in 2 minutes requires a charge rate of 2,700kW; 2.7MW.

Let's turn this into a gas station equivalent. My local Costco has 12 pumps, so if you were to convert that into 12x 2.7MW EV charge spots that's a potential demand of 33MW with all chargers occupied.

I have 20x gas stations locally, so if we assumed all of these were replaced with EV charge stations with an average of 8 ports, that's 22MW/station, or 432MW. That's a huge increase in demand for a 100,000 person town.

But right now the big issues are:
- Battery tolerance of high rate of charge. Currently, Tesla Supercharging has a detrimental effect on the lives of the batteries, which is why they limit its use and it's now where near the rate we are discussing.
- Interface safety - Being able to have a consumer-handleable and reliable connection that could manage that kind of current in the rain, snow....etc It's a HUGE amount of power.
Not to worry … down here Buccees will add 100 chargers with a touch screen food menu … hire some:

1E011A35-7350-480B-B33F-EC7DC683C03A.jpeg
 
How so do you reckon though? My car isn't the most efficient by any means and I can completely fill the tank in 3-4 mins and have around 275-300 miles of range. Approximately how long does an EV need to charge on average to get that much range? Honestly don't know, but asking... As with any other battery type in life, faster charge rates do diminish battery quality/longevity and I've never seen that hurdle neutralized regardless of battery type. Battery technology/improvement seems to be at a snail's pace these days as only so much can be done with what we have to work with.
The current Tesla Model S quotes 200 miles of battery range in 15 minutes. The charging rate starts slowing after that.

Those are the old 18650 cells though (designed in the 1990s). The new 4680 cells that just started production can charge significantly faster and can hold the faster charge rate for longer.
 
Last edited:
We aren't getting close. The issue is the current required to deliver the energy in the time required. Moving, say, 90kWh in 2 minutes requires a charge rate of 2,700kW; 2.7MW.

Let's turn this into a gas station equivalent. My local Costco has 12 pumps, so if you were to convert that into 12x 2.7MW EV charge spots that's a potential demand of 33MW with all chargers occupied.

I have 20x gas stations locally, so if we assumed all of these were replaced with EV charge stations with an average of 8 ports, that's 22MW/station, or 432MW. That's a huge increase in demand for a 100,000 person town.

But right now the big issues are:
- Battery tolerance of high rate of charge. Currently, Tesla Supercharging has a detrimental effect on the lives of the batteries, which is why they limit its use and it's no where near the rate we are discussing.
- Interface safety - Being able to have a consumer-handleable and reliable connection that could manage that kind of current in the rain, snow....etc It's a HUGE amount of power.


Your definition of close is different than mine. "Getting close" to me is in the next 20 years. Everything you said is true, but it is all based on our current battery technology. Technology evolves. When we focus more attention on it, there will be innovation. Currently we're stuck on oil, and for good reason. It's cheap and easy. Therefore alternative energy is seen as an afterthought. Yes, alternative energy is expensive, slow, and cumbersome. But it won't always be that way.
 
Your definition of close is different than mine. "Getting close" to me is in the next 20 years. Everything you said is true, but it is all based on our current battery technology. Technology evolves. When we focus more attention on it, there will be innovation. Currently we're stuck on oil, and for good reason. It's cheap and easy. Therefore alternative energy is seen as an afterthought. Yes, alternative energy is expensive, slow, and cumbersome. But it won't always be that way.

The battery problem, while a significant one with current Lithium battery technology, is secondary to having a safe way for people handling a 2.7MW connection interface as well as the sourcing of that electricity, which will require massive transmission and generation expansion and that means a large nuclear build-out to support it.

We've had "alternative" energy for the better part of 70 years (an alternative to oil, which I assume is what you are alluding to) in the form of nuclear power. Transportation is but the "last mile" in achieving deep decarbonization. The power grid, heating, those are other huge consumers of fossil fuels. Shipping is another, and then there is flight, which will arguably be the most difficult due to the nature of jet propulsion and will therefore require some sort of alternative fuel that can provide the same utility. Batteries can't do thrust.

IF there is a storage breakthrough, that is, a technology that can reliably charge at the rate we are discussing, be significantly lighter and last 10+ years in service, then we have all those other bits to deal with still. We aren't new to electricity or the requirements for safely handling high current/voltage interfaces, it's making that workable for "average Joe" that will require some work, and making it durable enough.

It's a multi-faceted problem is my point, it isn't just a battery issue.
 
The battery problem, while a significant one with current Lithium battery technology, is secondary to having a safe way for people handling a 2.7MW connection interface as well as the sourcing of that electricity, which will require massive transmission and generation expansion and that means a large nuclear build-out to support it.

We've had "alternative" energy for the better part of 70 years (an alternative to oil, which I assume is what you are alluding to) in the form of nuclear power. Transportation is but the "last mile" in achieving deep decarbonization. The power grid, heating, those are other huge consumers of fossil fuels. Shipping is another, and then there is flight, which will arguably be the most difficult due to the nature of jet propulsion and will therefore require some sort of alternative fuel that can provide the same utility. Batteries can't do thrust.

IF there is a storage breakthrough, that is, a technology that can reliably charge at the rate we are discussing, be significantly lighter and last 10+ years in service, then we have all those other bits to deal with still. We aren't new to electricity or the requirements for safely handling high current/voltage interfaces, it's making that workable for "average Joe" that will require some work, and making it durable enough.

It's a multi-faceted problem is my point, it isn't just a battery issue.

Valid points. Only clarification I have is my reference to alternative energy. My reference is solely focused on automotive transportation. We are in an automotive forum and the topic is EVs, after all.

Very little effort has been put into alternative means for fueling automobiles until Elon Musk made it "cool." If we as a society did put more effort into finding and advancing alternative means, the mountains you write about would be molehills. We created an infrastructure that relied heavily on fossil fuels (still referring to automobiles here) and we'll, at some point have to evolve that infrastructure toward an alternative. I agree with you, electricity is hard to manage on a grand scale. But it's hard to implement anything "new." Human tendency is to resist change and "go with what works."

There will always be a place for fossil fuels. As you stated, batteries don't provide thrust. But I can tell you, there will be a viable widespread alternative energy source for automobiles in my lifetime.

Don't tell me how hard it is to change. Tell me how to make the change easier.
 
Valid points. Only clarification I have is my reference to alternative energy. My reference is solely focused on automotive transportation. We are in an automotive forum and the topic is EVs, after all.

Very little effort has been put into alternative means for fueling automobiles until Elon Musk made it "cool." If we as a society did put more effort into finding and advancing alternative means, the mountains you write about would be molehills. We created an infrastructure that relied heavily on fossil fuels (still referring to automobiles here) and we'll, at some point have to evolve that infrastructure toward an alternative. I agree with you, electricity is hard to manage on a grand scale. But it's hard to implement anything "new." Human tendency is to resist change and "go with what works."

There will always be a place for fossil fuels. As you stated, batteries don't provide thrust. But I can tell you, there will be a viable widespread alternative energy source for automobiles in my lifetime.

Don't tell me how hard it is to change. Tell me how to make the change easier.

By having people not demanding 2 minute fuel ups ;) That's the easy answer.

The idea of charging at home has great appeal and vetos the requirement for charge-on-the-fly for most driving. Unfortunately, that won't work for everyone, so there will need to be a gas station equivalent. This, and the desire to be able to do road trips and utilitarian stuff (like towing trailers) in the same manner we do with FF vehicles is what drives the push for trying to increase the charge rate and range, which, as we've discussed, is a significant obstacle, not just from a battery perspective, but from a grid, generation and interface perspective as well. This is also why FCEV's have been pursued on and off.

You know the first cars were actually electric? There were quite a few EV's back in the early days of automotive history but FF's quickly won out due to reasons that are reasonably obvious. GM of course then reignited the EV concept back with the EV1. The electric car itself isn't a difficult, or new concept, it's that nobody had put much effort into it, let alone doing it differently like Tesla has done. Most of the current battery technology originates in the consumer electronics realm, so there's understandably room for some improvement there, but not, with current chemistry, anywhere near what's being demanded.

Circling back to something you said though, that resonates here: "But it's hard to implement anything "new." Human tendency is to resist change and "go with what works."

That gets to the root of the matter: it's human behaviour too, not just technology that is the issue. We are demanding EV's behave the same as FF vehicles, the obstacles to which we are quite aware. I expect the answer isn't necessarily in a battery "breakthrough" which may not happen, but in a societal and human behaviour one. It would be within that shift where EV's would gradually improve; evolve, like their fossil cousins have. Elon has made EV's sexy, that's a huge step, just like Apple did with the iPhone.
 
For the most part, EV fueling is different than ICE fueling. 1st, most of us charge at home so you start every day with a "full tank" which is a great way to go. Many companies offer subsidized or even free charging at work.
On the go, you can charge to full if you have the time, but generally you charge enough to get to your destination.
Remember, Superchargers are more expensive than charging at home, especially if your electricity costs are low. I have solar panels; electricity in CA is very expensive.

While battery charging tech will continue to evolve, I doubt a 3 minute, 300 mile fill up is in the cards.
These cars are different; they are not for everyone. But if an EV works for you, you just might love one. We are very happy with our Model 3.
Definitely as I can respect that... we all have different uses/expectations for everyday things. In my area, somewhat rural, there are some charging stations. At several Sheetz stations, movie theater lot, etc. I do see quite a few Teslas, Leafs, etc., so it's slowly evolving in even areas like ours.

On another note, being severe asthmatic I of course would appreciate cleaner air and I'd be 100% for electric in many situations if it could ever get rid of the insane diesel smoke haze polluting lots of areas. I know diesel has tons of uses and lots of avid fans, but it's far from ideal for issues such as mine and I simply can't totally avoid that type of exposure.
 
Back
Top