turboplanner

1 hour ago, onetrack said:

I keep hearing about how the cost of batteries and EV's is going to reduce. It hasn't, and any reduction in pricing is going to be 10-15 years out, not in 1 or 2 years.

EV's are still exorbitant in initial purchase pricing, and there's no saving whatsoever in going electric - in fact, the overall costs are vastly higher than any ICE vehicle.

No-one even mentions that the batteries are stuffed after 10 years and you're up for a new one, at massive cost - some $20K to $30K.

 

Would you buy a petrol or diesel car where the engine had to be totally replaced at huge cost, after just 10 years?

10 years is around 150,000 - 200,000kms for most car owners, most petrol and diesel engines last for 400,000kms today, and their overhaul cost is low.

And on top of that, no-one has mentioned the cost of battery disposal. I have little doubt that getting rid of an old EV battery will cost you dearly, just as trying to get rid of worn-out tyres costs dearly today.

Amazing the number of people who will tell you that "things always get cheaper" and "there'll be a break though". These are people who don't know what's in Weet Bix.

Currently the big issues seem to be.

With existing customers, the no-maintenance lie. Bearings were not going to wear out, suspensions would last forever, they'd never need a wheel alignment, wiper motors would no longer fail, switches would no longer fail, lights would last forever, brakes would never have to be serviced, and so on. Along with the stories is appears some of the sales outlets aren't set up for maintenance and stories of cars parked up for weeks are starting to emerge in the auto sections of papers some reporting that there are safety issues that need to be followed when doing service work around the battery area and so a new set of learning and procedures required. This has always been one of the key drivers of customers buying habits.

GM was one of the first car builders to discover that cars are bought by pocket capacity. Young people in their first jobs could just afford the A size car; when they got married and had kids they'd reached the point where they could buy the B size car; when they'd made it they could afford the C Size car. The EV industry is having a go selling the B customers the A cars and so on and the results are reflected in the latest FY Market share results in several countries around the world. In some countries Hybrids have been incorporated into the BEV market to try to hype up the country's CO2 performance. In some countries Hybrid is losing market share.

Of course the reason for trying EV in the first place was that they were zero emission.

Now there are lists of what's not zero emission from the Coal-fired power plants that charge them because renewables can't handle peak power, from the exotic materials not required on ICE, from the materials in the batteries, from the massive expension of mining to get those exotic materials, from the yet to be invented of exposing the dead batteries and so on. People are starting to want to see the affordable cars that were going to be emerging, and of course since they were the drivers of a CO2-free world, Zero emission cars.

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

The graphic I did there was total cost of life. For batteries some items come out, fuel comes out, engine maintenance comes out, air cleaners, exhaust come out. Etc then the electric items go in. A new schedule goes in etc and the bars change. So both ICE and EV are costed separately based on the way they operate and perform. 

This is the same vehicle as the earlier graphic, but here around the city the Annual distance is much lower and a lot of the time the truck is operating under 80 km/hr, so there's no exponential power demand to push the wind out of the way.

Comparing this to an electric equivalent, the missing airpower demand will leave a lot more charge in the batteries, but the battery pack changeover cost will add a lot to operating costs because there's very little fuel cost to offset it.

......heart, "Oshka Anishinobe, is my kind of National ..........................

19 minutes ago, Ian said:

So the biofuels, ethanol and bio-diesel both give you green brownie points.

But ethanol impacts on range. https://www.flightglobal.com/corn-to-run-can-ethanol-be-used-as-a-clean-alternative/71449.article

Are there any other manufactured fuels which are carbon neutral. Lots of hype around hydrogen but its difficult to store and refuelling would dangerous.

All of that is in the past or being used but static for one reason or another. I was in a group at one stage that was asked to look 50 years ahead and consider re-purposing our roadsides to grow crops for ethanol.

Petrol is working fine, pulling ahead of diesel in the newer vehicles.

HICEV is nudging in but has to handle volume and Hindenberg factors.

23 minutes ago, Ian said:

I get that more real estate is needed if everyone charges at a power station. My point was that significantly less space is needed because 95% of people will charge at home.

The exceptions are going to be around period of peak demand, ie public holidays, rental changeover etc. Interestingly these aren't going to be in cities. They'll be in regional areas.

The 7.2 kWh is generally considered a home charger not what you'd see in a commercial charging site. You might find this at a hotel where you leave the vehicle overnight but not at site offering vehicle "refueling" services. It's a bit like saying that your refuelling time in a car is the time taken to pump fuel from multiple jerry cans with a hand pump. Yes I've done it but its not a likely scenario.

 

From the graphic the cost is 1.2M over 3 years in fuel, are you saying that batteries are less cost effective for metro? Simply because fuel is a smaller part of overall costs in metro. Couldn't you simply rightsize for metro by having smaller battery packs?

With the removable batter packs, what ratio is required between the truck and batteries to maintain capacity or is this a piece of string question. A couple of large solar farms in the right spot along highways could cater to the demand? 

 

The difficult thing for government is going to be the loss in fuel taxes. At some point they're going to have to charge by the km or similar.

 

 

The graphic I did there was total cost of life. For batteries some items come out, fuel comes out, engine maintenance comes out, air cleaners, exhaust come out. Etc then the electric items go in. A new schedule goes in etc and the bars change. So both ICE and EV are costed separately based on the way they operate and perform. Unit costing is done for every truck in the fleet, so if the route has a lot of upgrades that will be seen in the bars. For complex applications we follow the truck with compass, altimeter, stopwatch, and record the speedo over and over again. We can then use this data as a profile to predict the performance, fuel burn etc. I’ve had trucks shipped from Japan to the Engine bay stripped, modules fitted and into service in Australia. The application was on-site with top up after each mission. So no surprises and they are working well 17 years later. 

11 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

If anybody thinks that my main criticism of the video was wrong or overblown, I would really like to hear from them. Please. 

People defend their turf and their beliefs; that's not what RAA are there for, but that's what came across.

No one apologised for classifying a flat tyre as an engine failure.

So I wouldn't dwell on it; what you were saying rang true with me.

":......am not happy with your words."

This was a stinging reprimand in the gentle Ziigwan Anishinaabe people, but in the Climbing Wolf Coffee and Beer Bar it normally just warranted an extra shot of water in the drink.

"I apologise" he said conscious that he was speaking to a real Nations person and not just a box ticking gravy trainer from Wodonga. "Who would you suggest I call?"

Ziigwan thought for a minute and then said Zigwan................................

31 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

That truck on the photo above has a $120000 battery pack. You would hope they last a long time.

 

 

 

 

7 to 10 years quoted by most manufacturers, so maybe competitive for linehaul operators depending of charging cost, but a hurdle for Metro.

45 minutes ago, Ian said:

The issues with swappable batteries is that you need to standardise on a battery unit, or subunit which is common across manufacturers. Swapable batteries work for fleets where there is standardisation and commonality, not with the current market. If Tesla had pulled it off a decade ago, given their first mover advantage they might have pulled it off however they gave up.

Given the current state/rate of development of batteries it would probably slow innovation in the area rather than enhance it.

 

What most people appear to be missing is that if we get to 80% EV the power demands on our grid are going to be about double what they were a decade ago, how's that going to work. Australia hasn't grown it's grid for a long time. The market models which optimise static capacity such as energy spot markets generally don't work to stimulate long term investments so you end up with suboptimal outcomes. Based upon the experience in other countries intermittent renewable power sources require equivalent gas peaking power generation to cover shortfalls, so essentially you're paying for 2 different types of generation and still burning fossil fuels. 

 

However the point that you're missing is that most people will refuel at home, the number of people travelling who require charging will only be a fraction of those who currently use service stations. Only on longer trips will peak demand occur, think queuing on long weekends at locations 4-6 hours out of Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne during holidays. Holiday rentals will also change, with those within range of the single charge commanding a premium.  Most consumer vehicles recharge in 20m not 20 hours from a fast charge point. If there's a car that requires 20hours I don't think many will sell.

Tesla S: 21 hours on a 7.5 kW/Hr outlet.

There will be some people who continue driving until there's nothing left, not understanding that if you do that the time from zero to full charge is exponentially longer.

At the other endo of the scale are >60 kW/Hr chargers just topping up

Chargers slow down when a battery is 80% full.

So a lot of choices to make.

Another place Level 2 8 hours to full charge

Charging experience in a Kia on long distance US trip: 18% to 100% 3 hours, 30 mile top up 3 hours, several outlets no fast chargers available.

Tesla stats: 3.7 kWH charge 27 hours, 7 kWH 15 hours, 22 kWH 4 hours

Tesla Model S Long Range 2019 15 hours

My intention isn't to provide design data for building an EV Service station, just pointing out that a lot more real estate will be needed. 

7 hours ago, onetrack said:

There's only one thing that will make EV's viable, and it is swappable EV batteries. No need to queue up for chargers or spend precious time looking for a charger - just drive into a swap station, swap the battery out in 2 mins, and head out again. The batteries can be charged overnight utilising off-peak power, instead of requiring huge recharge demand in the middle of the day.

 

Chinese companies have already started down this road, hopefully the trend will catch on. The fact that huge numbers of people now live in apartments makes the battery swap station idea even better.

 

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2022/08/you-can-swap-an-ev-battery-in-china-for-7/

 

This is the current status in Australia by carsale,com.au as at July 2022.

The link is about battery changeover and its cost, but includes some of the issues before an on-road battey changeover network can be set up.

One of the issues EV has to conquer is infrastructure.

Land: Service stations for petrol/diesel have a land size and layout for perhaps a 5 minute refuel cycle. A 15 minute to 20 hour cycle requires a lot a lot longer recharge cycle, so a lot more recharge points and a much more expensive land area, and access from surrounding roads.

If a fast battery changeover can be invented, then you need a dedicated forklift safe zone free of people, circuit protection during the changeover, and an affordable cost, to cope with the smarties who come in for a battery swap whenever their commute/homecharge cars need a new battery.

https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/how-much-does-it-cost-to-replace-an-ev-battery-136621/

.......but it gets worse because Turbo is a First Nations Canadian Indigenous person, "Never Ending Story" the name came about when NES' parents were almost asleep and Climbing Wolf ...................

21 minutes ago, Ian said:

For person transport batteries just work. Electric cars are faster and require less maintenance than their petrol and diesel brethren, they also cost significantly less to run. As battery costs decline, electric vehicles will get cheaper. 

For freight it's not so black and white, batteries wear out quickly and they eat into the carrying capacity of the vehicle. However for metro use they're probably still a good fit. Long haul will be using liquid fuels for some time. As costs of carbon capture are costed in some routes will be cheaper via electric rail.

For air transport batteries don't make any sense at all. The only options that I can see are liquid at room temperature fuels and nuclear. Nuclear not because it's a good thing to put in a plane but it does have zero emissions and provides effectively unlimited range. And planes have flown with reactors aboard.

I've been in a strageic discussion just recently. With round 170 different truck variants multiplied by the number of makes then divide up into power demand applications, and then given that nearly 100% have to earn an income, some will work on BEV, some won't. It's a matter of physics, power demand = battery drain. There's a high startability demand, a high acceleration of load demand, a high wind power demand over up km/hr, and an a high power demand on dirt.

The Utes that BrendAn referred to towing a caravan, boat or trailer are only achieving about 100 km to full discharge, so a long time even on the high speed chargers. Trucks take that a further step. I was present at the drive-by certifcation of one 23 tonne new truck model, so know it worked but the programme was cancelled. In 1986 I was promised the battery breakthrough which would make BEV trucks feasible; the manufacturer hasn't stopped trying but hasn't made the breakthrough. When you get up to a five trailer road train operating on dirt in the outback the numbers just don't stack up at all. This introduces a new problem because if by some chance it became feasible to build a BEV B Double, the ICE base collatoral would be lost, and without that road train prime movers could not be built and without that Australia's beef industry would be crippled because today the market is geared to turnoffs hudreds of cattle at a time, so when they are ready for sale on a property the owner just books enough road trains to take the lot.

38 minutes ago, Ian said:

It is a free world and you can believe whatever you want, however I believe in occam's razor as a problem solving tool. Look I'm not a big believer in theories where organisations like the UN and agenda 41 and special agencies have significant hidden agendas and move mysteriously behind the scenes. Burning fossil fuels and polluting the atmosphere was a problem waiting to happen. You can't put gigatons of stuff into the atmosphere and expect nothing to happen. Similarly dumping CFC's into the atmosphere disrupted the ozone layer. In the past dumping pollution into streams and rivers created problems which are still with us today. Ask the Japanese about mercury.

 

I believe things like politicians and people in position's of power taking bribes for personal advantage and vested parties corrupting processes for advantage. They happen and they're documented. Loonies tend to get together and try to influence things and when that fails they blow shit up and kill people. Just look at the current processes happening in Australia where christian groups are trying to use branch stacking to take over an established political party, but in essence they've making the party unelectable as moderates distance themselves from the fundis, demoncracy in action. Gambling related organisations lobby Governments to continue to allow problem gamblers to be their prey despite the obvious harm. The simple fact is that problem gamblers contribute the most, they give all their income and more. 

Essentially there are extremely powerful and well heeled groups in plain sight who will be significantly disadvantaged by the curtailment of fossil fuels. I'd be expecting them to be spending enormous sums to try to maintain the status quo and confuse simple souls for as long as possible. It worked for the tobacco industry so why not fossil fuels. 😉 Take a look at the Panama papers to see dishonest wealthy lying and engaging in fraud and cheating to keep their lucure.

Show me any peer reviewed or even a paper endorsed by a number of academics or news organisations which shows that this spectre is haunting our society and handing power to faceless men?

 

My world is pretty simple it's made up of money, power, issue motivated groups and individuals who like to create and do things and of course the mob who can be flushed in most directions. For my compass I use science and technology, other people use the vibe, whispers and happy thoughts.

 

There are about 2000 aircraft owners in RA, and I guess about 5000 in GA used for recreation (fun) only. Are you suggesting these people should just sit back and  write off their investments?

9 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

and  of the 700 models of electric cars 600 are probably rubbish.

whats the carbon footprint like for those solar farms and electric car manufacturing.

i like toyotas idea of pursuing hydrogen technology at least it will be able to power aircraft. electric aircraft travel is a century away.

I pulled the latest manufacturing FY manufacturing figures, 2021

China's BEV market share of total sales is 2.6%, much the same as Australia's at 1.95%.   Still the same number of vehicles but a more realistic measure.

9 hours ago, Captain said:

There is Turd changing history again, as we all know that Abe was shot by JWB.

[Special note: Cappy is suffering from post grammatic shock]

1 hour ago, Ian said:

My takes on it is that Ann Bressington is a bit a looney, and taking in her theories as gospel is really drinking the cool aid.

You have groups like this https://likethedaysofnoah.wordpress.com/agenda-21-by-anne-bressington/ who think its a good idea. I'd just call them the religious fringe. ie the world is 7000 years old and homos should be cured types. If man was meant to fly God would have given him wings etc.

 

Agenda 21 is a non-binding resolution which simply says try not to shit in the nest. Build sustainably.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

Conspiracy theories associated with Agenda 21 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21#Conspiracy_theories

 

Articles on the conspiracy theories

Conspiracy theory associated with Agenda 21 https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jun/24/agenda-21-conspiracy-theory-sustainability

 

This is pure nonsense and drivel.

 

 

Fine, you choose to frame a 2013 Speech at the Adelaide Convention Centre by Anne Breesington within the format of an unrelated  extreme website (the days of noah) and then use that frame to paint her a looney.

It's a free world and anyone is free to do that, however for the rest of the world what she had to say at that presentation probably gives enough detail to do the other 30 or so hours reading to grasp the sequence and get the references.

Let's say you're one of those people who quit reading at page 2, the issue is if France opts to ban corporate jets to reduce atmospheric CO2 output, then for whatever reason switches and let's the executive jets go but bans short-route flights, then it's a possibility that Australia will make some off decisions too, like banning non-essential CO2- producing activities like flying for fun, which means some people could lose the chance to hire aircraft for recreation, but others could find they just lost their entire investment.  That's the purpose of doing the research; it's certainly not compulsory.

Is this the one from Mackay?

1 hour ago, Ian said:

This sound a bit conspiracy theoryish to me. I'd suggest that you read up on what the IPCC is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change and understand it's funding model.

I'm not interested in conspiracy theories.

I use Wikipedia a lot, but never for final documents because anyone can overwrite the original posts, and they could be a 14 year old nerd from Dayton Ohio. It's great to pick up the basics, but then you go to the genuine documents  and papers. Have a look at the list of authors at the end of the above link; know them? are they climate scientists? oceanographers? etc.

What I recommended was for people to research the actual bodies and actual people in the trail. If you do you will find:

Ann Bressington's discoveries which lead to some key contacts.

1968 - Origin of the Environmental movement when the Club of Rome was formed.

The document called The First Global Revolution, authored by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider, pages 104 and 105 say:

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea of:

·         Pollution

·         Threat of Global Warming

·         Water shortages

·         Famine

And the like would fit the bill.”

1972 “Limits to Growth” document.

UN’s  Maurice Strong and his relationship with COR and his activities and statements.

1992 Agenda 21 and what it is.

Yes the Sydney Harbour photos were a hoax, but that wasn't what I said.

Let's not lose the end game here:

In France it looks like the loss of short range RPT

In Australia it could extend to Recreational Aviation, Sky Diving, Tourist Flights etc - all the non-essential travel.

Some people already are simply going along with the trend, happy to give up flying; if you can see where this might lead, you'll need some hard facts to make a case. Best to look for where it all started and who is involved.

Just now, kgwilson said:

So the science is all wrong then. CO2 levels aren't rising, the oceans aren't becoming more acidic and global temperatures are not increasing. 

I recommended people did their own research into the lot. Certainly some will not get the link between ocean rise and global temperature and othe complicated links.

15 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Looks like the privte jet franternity complained enough, but the airlines will have a bit to do: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56716708

 

When global warming occurs the oceans expand in their basins and the level rises around the world.

At the meeting I attended in 2005 an ex CSIRO member of the IPCC told us this, and that we could expect Bangladesh to be indundated and a hundred million people would die. Australia sent a Senate committee around Australia assessing our beaches. Coastal Councils were given predicted global warming flood levels and were told to refuse DA's below the expected sea levels. Some did. Then the predictions faltered. The Sydney Tidal gauge, which measures ocean level without the need for helpful modelling shows that in the period starting in the 1800s to current there has been no increase in high tide levels.

If you, like me start to get curious, you can google Ann Bressington, a Member of the Legislative Council of South Australia who, in 2013 felt something was wrong and tracked down the Club of Rome and an outrageously corrupt United Nations official who decided they could make money using the power of the United Nations. The Club still exists today, hiding in plain sight. More and more UN people joined the network. At one point a committee is appointed to look at ways of making big money; the committee reports back that they have chosen about ten things, and one of them happens to be Climate change. The UN/COR group form the  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), The IPCC is not a scientific body, it's the body set up to drive the "Climate Change Agenda" and new world order which was to  make the billions of dollars. The Intergovernmental Panel as its name suggests has the job of coaching the world leaders, and you can google IPCC and see the regular bulletins they send to countries including Australia, including the one which reset the start date back 245 years for the 1.5 degree  Armageddon/Doomsday. 1.5 degrees is about the average difference between Sydney and Melbourne. They flattened the line gradient from an embarrassing arrival about now to an almost flat line allowing it to be used as a stick for most of this century.

Ann Brassington was treated horribly, but she had brought the evidence to the surface. 

Shorthaul Jet travel has changed our lives and economy in Australia. When you get up into the Mining areas and look at places like Roma in Queensland you see the volume of RPT and executive jets and how they bring workers from capital cities to mines which earn billions of dollars for Australia. You see a dozen luxury coaches running around a medium size town on a Monday morning picking up miners to take them to the mines. Where we are going, driven by Agenda21  and the Great Reset is scary, with things like renewable power generation in Australia still only able to generate about 1% of peak power demand on hot days, and the failure of the UK Ocean wind farms to supply power to every home by 2020 triggering a reopening of coal mines. I would recommend people don't look at the situation like football barrackers but do some serious research on where this all came from and what the agendas and targets are, because our major political parties have committed us to a life we will not like.

.......rabbit that was just a fraction too slow.

He made the decision that the Drifter could be repaired, then spent an hour, sweating profusely to drag it behind the only tree for miles.

He said "Bless you, my son" waving his hand gently over the Drifter wreck, but the Drifter was a heathen and spat back at him saying XXXX XXX. With just a slight flick he chanded it into a Thruster, and although they were an inferior aircraft with a reputation for mangling their pilots, Cappy was well-pleased. A Bluehead came screaming across the paddocks at three feet punching a hole through the side of an Angus bull who had also said  XXXX XXX a few moments before. It fitted itself, and guided by more serene Cappy than usual. He'd already changed his avatar from Abraham Lincoln to a shot of himself looking at the camera with his heart painted red, apparently a new bikie fad.

As he flew along he sang a popular rap song ...........................................

3 hours ago, facthunter said:

 Why the high circuit speed for the King cobra?  Nev

Sometimes there is a "battle" sequence.

Tyabb's Air Show usually has one as a main event with the Yak 9, several Mustangs, Kittyhawk, scale Mustang(s), having an all in dogfight and "attacking" ground targets with suitable bangs and flames.

The sky is fiilled with aircraft making repeated attacks from all directions.

I suspect the Tyabb show is fully choriographed and practiced before the event.

44 minutes ago, RFguy said:

OME

yes indeed. you'd expect 55-100 kts in circuit for most GA.  ... and  you only get one KNOWN update per second (although you can generate predictive data at any rate) 

 

There's alot that can be nutted out . IE time based  / conflict likelihood based etc hybrid. I'll have to read up a bit on TCAS.

You also have the 1500 and 500' circuits at many airports 500' will be under 65 kts, some by a big margin, but overtaking the 1000' aircraft to the landing zone becaue of their shorter circuits. The 1500' entry aircraft will be travelling quite a bit faster, sometimes on the same route. Helicopters on the Bass Strait rigs will be in the circuit mix, and that's another lot of speeds from R22 to multi passenger Bass Strait gas well, Hay Point ship's pilot and other commercial operations where they don't want to mess around, and you have 2 or 3 12 aircraft per circuit double circuit airports, but mostly there are tower controllers helping separation there.

......take command.”

Some NES readers may think that was presumptive of Cappy, but Cappy has stood shoulder to shoulder fighting the heathen in the Kyneton Pass.

Biggles must have heard about it because he didn’t flinch. He just said Carry on”

The fighter aircraft were .....

..............Cootamundra picture theatre when a box of Jaffas he was holding ......................