wait wait. . the other point The Tesla has that MASSIVE 84 KWh battery option (puts the car over 100k, but lets use that)

How long would it take a person to drive from Seattle to Boston in a Tesla? ...charging over night, of course. I'll even pretend that there is a charging station exactly where it would run out of juice. Compare to a Jetta Tdi. (with a driver who stops for 10 hrs each day)

Oh, and I chose Seattle to Boston because obviously LA to Boston would take the car thru some very hot (brutal to the Tesla efficiency) States.

Lithium is being put to much better use in electric and hybrid vehicles rather than in iPads and other such gadgets. Electric and hybrid vehicles represent a significant first step toward reducing our energy dependence on the ME. iPads are just toys...we can live without them.

Cell phones too?

What if you can do your job with an ipad* and cell phone in lieu of a commute?

*Okay, yeah you're right, the ipad is a toy, so how about a notebook PC and cell phone in lieu of a commute?

How many people drive the 3,000 miles from Seattle to Boston in ANY car!!??

I would think that the vast majority of people would fly

Regardless of which specific car (i.e. Porsche Panamera or VW TDi or Toyota Prius or Tesla S), the *tiny sliver* of people who would drive tend to drive 500-600 miles each day and spend the night in a hotel/motel. So it would take them 5 or 6 days.......which is why most people would fly.

However, if you were the one in a million who would want to do it in your Tesla S XR, you'd have 300 miles on a full charge. So at your half-hour lunch, you'd add 150 miles of charge using a "Super Charger" (300 miles of range added per hour), and again at dinner. Then charge it using the conventional charger overnight at the hotel (62 miles of range added per hour).

Charging Model S | Tesla Motors

btw, I did the math.

Tesla 85 KWh

iPad 25 Wh

So, One Tesla uses the equivalent of 3,400 iPads. ...or about 17,000 iPhones. (5Wh:)

Is One Tesla really worth 17,000 iPhones?

Yes, if I never have to see the comment, "Sent from my Iphone" again.....

:D yer kill'n me here.

You're too serious....I sentence you to hang from the neck until you cheer up....

It will be interesting to see what most cars are being powered by 20, 30 or 40 years from now.

Gas, diesel, biodiesel, hydrogen, CNG, electric, a combination of some of those?

I truly have no idea.

It seems like over that long time period, it won't be gasoline, but I'm certainly not sure. The emissions issues of gas engines seems pretty much handled (I don't think a modern midlevel car emits much in the way of pollution, does it?), and if technology can increase MPG on an average commuter car to something like 80 MPG, then who knows.

It does seem to me that we're getting a little ahead of ourselves on the all electric cars, though. I.e., it's the battery technology that should be taken care of first, since that seems to me to be the biggest/hardest challenge. If that ever happens, the rest of the electric car would seem relatively easy to develop. If it never happens, all this money on electric cars would seem to be wasted.

Exactly.

My work here is done. ;)

Nothing new, it's ALWAYS been about batteries. But at least someone is making a ride that can possibly do two or more days of commuting w/o a charge.....albeit pricey but 'baby steps'....

I just did a quick search, it looks like the automakers are fairly actively working on a variety of different energy sources for the propulsion of cars.

We Hear: BMW to use Toyota Hybrid, Hydrogen Powertrains - WOT on Motor Trend

I have to admit, I don't know enough about how batteries work to have a prediction on the future of battery powered cars. Is it reasonably possible that in the future we could develop a battery that weighs 100-200 lbs, could be charged in an hour or less, is recycleable or otherwise ok environmentally, is a reasonable cost and lifespan, and can carry a passenger vehicle 300 miles? Or is that just beyond reality, given the physical limitations of a battery?

This was from a year ago.....but some interesting numbers.

Nick Chambers | PluginCars.com

According to a researcher working on I.B.M.'s Battery 500 project, lithium-ion technology has been stagnant since 2003 and there are few signs that it will show a dramatic breakthrough soon.

Referring to Moore's Law—in which computer processing power doubles every two years—Winfried Wilcke, the senior manager Battery 500, in a New York Times blog post said, "Forget Moore’s Law—it’s nothing like that. Lithium ion, which clearly is the best battery technology today, is flat, completely flat since 2003." Working on the assumption that battery technology is likely to make huge jumps every now and then, rather than steadily increasing like computer speeds, Wilcke's team has been developing lithium-air batteries for the last few years.

Lithium-air is one of the most promising next generation batteries due to the fact that it could provide a 500 mile range in a drivetrain and battery combo that weighs about the same as a combustion engine drivetrain plus the fuel needed to go 500 miles—but it is turning out to be a very tricky battery chemistry to figure out. As the Battery 500 website says, it is a "very high risk/very high reward, long horizon project," and potential commercialization may not be until 2020 or beyond.

Wilcke says that his team has just begun to scratch the surface of lithium air's potential, but they have already made some significant breakthroughs, including showing that lithium-air batteries can be recharged (something that had yet to be proven and a necessity for electric cars). Even so, many other pieces of the puzzle have to fall into place before this kind of technology becomes viable. For instance, even if we could develop a lightweight lithium-air battery with the energy density of gasoline, recharging that battery in a reasonable amount of time would be a feat in and of itself.

To take a car 500 miles, you'd need about 130 kW of electricity, meaning a 130 kWh battery. Even at the highest level of home recharging now available (14.4 kW) it would take you about 17-18 hours to fully recharge that battery. Of course, you likely wouldn't need to do that much charging at home on an average day, so you'd need some kind of massively powerful quick recharge infrastructure if you were on a long road trip.

Certainly some of the DC fast chargers that are on the books for the future could supply enough electricity to fill that battery to 80% full in about a half hour, but imagine the stress on the grid in that half hour for all the local infrastructure—that's a draw of 260 kW, or about what 9 average American households use in one day, but supplied in a half hour of time. Now imagine if you had even a hundred of them doing it all at the same time.

Regardless of the gigantic infrastructure hurdles, it is technology that would clearly mark the breaking of any barriers to electric car adoption if it could be implemented.

One would assume that with current 'tiered' electric rates....you'd need solar panels to compensate for the increased load/bill you'd be getting.

Well at least the eco freak rich yuppies won't have to drive around in a Volt anymore. And it is, whatever it's technological merits, a very good looking car. But I hate to think what one of those things will be worth in five years. If it were my money* I'd get a real Lotus as track toy and, oh I don't know...an AMG MB, a BMW Alpina, a Panamera with all the trimmings....jeez so many possibilities.

*Oh wait some of it is! You get a tax credit for buying that luxo barge...after all the country has plenty of money to give away to people like Elon Musk and the rich who can afford his playthings. Right?

FWIW IMO it's gasoline and diesel power that has really seen the technological advances in the past thirty years. We are currently driving the most powerful, most reliable and cleanest cars ever built. The average economy sedan blows away the most powerful Porsche of thirty years. And the new 911 blows away what would have been considered the most powerful exotics- while getting 24 mpg.

As far as moving the pollution out of the city... what power plant siting has done is to move the pollution out of the entire air shed -- way out of SoCal

examples would be PNW hydro power being sent down there and the Four Corners coal plant which mainly serves SoCal and Lost Wages. Of course, that coal plant has polluted some of the most scenic areas in the US (Grand Canyon, Zion, etc.).

PV Solar will eventually solve the "coal problem" (if natural gas doesn't do it first). BEVs are perfect to put in place for future PV power. Remember you have to plan ahead for major infrastructure projects, some of which have 50 year or longer design lifetimes, and can takes many years to build also.

And... let's not forget the massive subsidies for the oil. Besides the health effects (which are subsidized), you have $$ sent overseas to countries that do not like us very much, and the cost for us to defend oil supplies for us and our allies, just for starters.

If you'd revisit my post and link you'd find that several of Tesla's latest patents are metal-air battery related.

What a stupid generalization. That's like saying all gasoline powered cars get 23 mpg. Really!?

I'd imagine that the incremental gains I've been talking about will come from many fronts, not just battery tech. Gasoline has always had the same energy density too. But we continue to make cars that are safer, quicker, quiter, easier to drive, with more conveniences, and STILL make gains in their efficiency (mpg).

Lithium-air batteries might be a big leap. But there are many other little ones that add up.

My post was to emphasize that nothing much has been posted or done on battery tech for awhile.

It's the biggest 'hole' in the subject. Charging, costs and distance served.....

These guys look happy in their zero emission sports mobile. ^^^ So there you go, no battery technology needed ^^^
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1340657254.jpg