Thailand will have one million electric cars by 2028

[Litlos]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Except to virtually everyone but you.

The meanings of words and phrases arise out of usage:  not out of dictionaries.

Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive.

 

Go back to quoting specs you do not understand, that was funnier.  But the term solid state is in the dictionary as is battery, but just for your ongoing education the term "Lead Acid Battery" is not in the dictionary either, somehow my fault as well?

 

Cheers

[Oxx]

52 minutes ago, Litlos said:

the term "Lead Acid Battery" is not in the dictionary

 

Yes, it is.

 

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/lead-acid-battery

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Litlos said:

Go back to quoting specs you do not understand, that was funnier.  But the term solid state is in the dictionary as is battery, but just for your ongoing education the term "Lead Acid Battery" is not in the dictionary either, somehow my fault as well?

 

Cheers

As I pointed out, dictionaries are descriptive not prescriptive.  They don't lead, they follow. And since virtually the whole engineering world and the companies that manufacture them call them solid state batteries, maybe  it's them you should be correcting? What do they know, after all? It's not like they've devoted billions of dollars and years of research on them.  Please, tell them that it's a misnomer to call them solid state batteries. I am sure that your assertion will be greeted with all the respect that it deserves. And who  knows, you might even feel inclined to share with them, at least, a link to those mysterious specifications you keep on referring to. It seems to be a very private joke that amuses you only. Come to think of it, your dissent from the popular usage of solid state batter is also very private, very peculiar, and very special to you. Maybe you should get out more.

[Litlos]

1 hour ago, Oxx said:

 

Yes, it is.

 

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/lead-acid-battery

There, but incorrect Have a close read:

"A lead acid battery is a 12-volt battery for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles consisting of lead-acid cells in series. The car's power comes from a 6-volt lead acid battery that, when fully charged, can run up to 80 km."

 

So quoting multi cells as 12v then immediately talking about a 6v, suspect as best, yes a definition, but flawed.

 

Cheers

[Oxx]

3 minutes ago, Litlos said:

So quoting multi cells as 12v then immediately talking about a 6v, suspect as best, yes a definition, but flawed.

 

When you put cells in series the voltage adds up.  Two 6 volt cells in series generates 12 volts.  Basic physics which any bright schoolchild will know about.

[Litlos]

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As I pointed out, dictionaries are descriptive not prescriptive.  They don't lead, they follow. And since virtually the whole engineering world and the companies that manufacture them call them solid state batteries, maybe  it's them you should be correcting? What do they know, after all? It's not like they've devoted billions of dollars and years of research on them.  Please, tell them that it's a misnomer to call them solid state batteries. I am sure that your assertion will be greeted with all the respect that it deserves. And who  knows, you might even feel inclined to share with them, at least, a link to those mysterious specifications you keep on referring to. It seems to be a very private joke that amuses you only. Come to think of it, your dissent from the popular usage of solid state batter is also very private, very peculiar, and very special to you. Maybe you should get out more.

Read the specs you supplied you supplied against the claims you have made. You fail every time, or simply cannot admit your failures. 50% was the specification you could not find, go away and find it, you may be a better more informed person for doing this.

 

It is not up to me to correct marketing warble that the common misinformed punter believes, I deal with accuracy. If you are prepared to accept the marketing jingle, well then drink the kool aid as well.

 

Until you can come up with real facts why not leave it alone.

 

Cheers

[Thomas J]

On 6/18/2021 at 11:18 AM, webfact said:

Krungthai bank's Compass thinktank has assessed that Thailand will have one million electric vehicles of all descriptions by 2028.

 

This will be made up of 93% hybrid vehicles, they suggested.

What that suggest with 93% being hybrid is that the forecast is that the public still does not trust that electric vehicles will be reliable enough in terms of charging stations to trust going on a trip and getting stuck.

As to hybrids I can't say this is universally true only my one experience.  I have purchased over a decade 5 different Lexus RX SUV models.  One of those was a 400H, hybrid model.  The cost of the car was about 25% higher at the time or about $10,000.  While the car drove and the reliability was fine, the gas mileage on the car was absolutely no different than any of the other 4 RX models I owned.  

So the bottom line is that I spent an extra $10,000 to get no financial payback.  Also I think that it is questionable how well electric and/or hybrid vehicles hold up on resale value.   The batteries don't last forever and they are expensive to replace.  So as the vehicle marches towards the mileage when the batteries will require replacing, buyers of these used cars will have to take into account just how much they will be paying for replacing the batteries in those cars.  I suspect they will be heavily discounted on the resale market.  When I sold the 400H model its resale value was not materially higher than its comparable gas only model. 

 

[Litlos]

1 minute ago, Oxx said:

 

When you put cells in series the voltage adds up.  Two 6 volt cells in series generates 12 volts.  Basic physics which any bright schoolchild will know about.

So why confuse cells vs batteries in the supplied definition? Maybe the dictionary authors as you supplied are not so bright and their definitions are best ignored?

 

Cheers

[Oxx]

16 minutes ago, Litlos said:

So why confuse cells vs batteries in the supplied definition?

The fact that you don't know the difference between "cell" and "battery" is hardly the dictionary writers' problem.

[Litlos]

5 minutes ago, Oxx said:

The fact that you don't know the difference between "cell" and "battery" is hardly the dictionary writers' problem.

Correct it is yours for pushing a flawed definition if you know better.

 

Cheers

 

[Oxx]

26 minutes ago, Litlos said:

Correct it is yours for pushing a flawed definition if you know better.

 

Cheers

 

My! You do seem to enjoy wallowing in your ignorance.  I suggest you use a dictionary and look up definitions for "cell" and "battery".

[billd766]

10 hours ago, Litlos said:

You have to be a bit more adaptable in dictionary usage. Solid State as one search term then battery as a secondary search term. But thanks for assisting in proving the point that Solid State Battery does not exist.

 

Cheers

You are incorrect.

 

The Solid State Battery does exist.

 

Not even Wikipedia agrees with you.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_battery

 

A solid-state battery is a battery technology that uses solid electrodes and a solid electrolyte, instead of the liquid or polymer gel electrolytes found in lithium-ion or lithium polymer batteries.[1][2]

While solid electrolytes were first discovered in the 19th century, several drawbacks, such as low energy densities, have prevented widespread application. Developments in the late 20th and early 21st century have caused renewed interest in solid-state battery technologies, especially in the context of electric vehicles, starting in the 2010s.

Materials proposed for use as solid electrolytes in solid-state batteries include ceramics (e.g., oxides, sulfides, phosphates), and solid polymers. Solid-state batteries have found use in pacemakers, RFID and wearable devices. They are potentially safer, with higher energy densities, but at a much higher cost. Challenges to widespread adoption include energy and power density, durability, material costs, sensitivity and stability.

 

There is more if you follow the link.

 

[Litlos]

11 hours ago, billd766 said:

You are incorrect.

 

The Solid State Battery does exist.

 

Not even Wikipedia agrees with you.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_battery

 

A solid-state battery is a battery technology that uses solid electrodes and a solid electrolyte, instead of the liquid or polymer gel electrolytes found in lithium-ion or lithium polymer batteries.[1][2]

While solid electrolytes were first discovered in the 19th century, several drawbacks, such as low energy densities, have prevented widespread application. Developments in the late 20th and early 21st century have caused renewed interest in solid-state battery technologies, especially in the context of electric vehicles, starting in the 2010s.

Materials proposed for use as solid electrolytes in solid-state batteries include ceramics (e.g., oxides, sulfides, phosphates), and solid polymers. Solid-state batteries have found use in pacemakers, RFID and wearable devices. They are potentially safer, with higher energy densities, but at a much higher cost. Challenges to widespread adoption include energy and power density, durability, material costs, sensitivity and stability.

 

There is more if you follow the link.

 

Wikipedia is a anyone can enter non verified data source. To use for any serious discussion would invite derision. From Wikipedia itself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

 

Cheers

[Litlos]

13 hours ago, Oxx said:

My! You do seem to enjoy wallowing in your ignorance.  I suggest you use a dictionary and look up definitions for "cell" and "battery".

Goodbye as you seem to be to close to your username.

[placeholder]

14 hours ago, Litlos said:

 

Until you can come up with real facts why not leave it alone.

 

A textbook example of irony.

[Litlos]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

A textbook example of irony.

Have you found that 50%? When you do note the 15 minute bit as well. This mean it can only do the 50% charge rate for 15 minutes, probably due to heating as that is the usual reason, but not specified. So lets assume based on experience after 15 minutes the 50% charge rate must be reduced to 25% to prevent overheating (?). So for example after one hour the total charge percentage increase is approx 31.25%. Take that in the 1980's I could, and did buy high specification batteries off the shelf that were capable of a sustained 25% charge rate, think like a carbon D cell vs an Alkaline cell, higher spec, but available. So after one hour of charge the 1980's battery had a 25% increase in charge and the new "Solid State" battery has 31.25% increase in charge based on 15minute increments (12.5+6.25+6.25+6.25). The increase in charge level for one hour is plus 25% to the "Solid State" battery for 40 years and billions of dollars of investment. Hence why I am somewhat sceptical of there being a breakthrough in the next few years with battery technology irrelevant of what it is called. They have been trying to improve capacitor specifications at the same time as a capacitor can take 100% charge in milliseonds, but has poor efficiency and does not hold the charge well. It may be a breakthrough in capacitor technology that is the game changer, again not that hopeful of an imminent breakthrough.

So taking the problem back to its roots and ignoring politicians and media pronouncements the problem is diminishing oil/gas reserves and a desire to reduce pollution? The perceived solution at the moment for some is the fully electric vehicle(EV). The major inherent problems of an EV are recharge time for the cells and what to do with the cells after use, you can only drink so much coffee while waiting for a recharge on the trip to Chiang Mai or wherever. There is also the problem of how the electricity for the charging is produced, from coal or even gas is a pollution source, renewables not viable at the moment in a lot of the locations where desired, the batteries again. So a lot of hurdles for the EV. Hybrid is better for convenience, but the fuel/pollution from the engine is again problematic, but hybrid has a smaller battery setup, so less to recycle or dispose of. The mantra for pollution reduction is "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle".

So how about a a different solution that has the convenience of the current vehicle with fuel refill in minutes, batteries as per the Hybrid ( a lot battery smaller setup than an EV), the fuel is produced from 100% renewables, and can be done now without any technology breakthrough's required?

I will now add a couple of links, one is from a test done in France and the other is from a proposal being worked up in Australia between Total Eren (an associate of Total Petroleum) and Province Mining. There are numerous similar proposals around the world, interestingly one is in Saudi Arabia.

https://www.whichcar.com.au/car-news/toyota-mirai-breaks-hydrogen-distance-record

https://www.provinceresources.com/hyenergygreenhydrogen

Unfortunately it spreads a lot information over several announcements. The brief is renewable power to Hydrogen, Hydrogen H2  catalysed to Ammonia NH3, now a liquid( N=Nitrogen makes up 78% or air). Transported as a liquid (higher energy density than a gas), supplied to a vehicle as a liquid ammonia or hydrogen gas (ammonia is safer), passed through a fuel cell to power the battery and hence vehicle, hence why a hybrid type vehicle. The conversion from Hydrogen to Ammonia releases atmospheric Nitrogen, which is then vented, products of combustion for Hydrogen is H2O eg water .

Note I own shares in both Total SE and Province Mining, but as we say for share trading DYOR (Do Your Own Research). I also have qualifications in electronics and have been working with cells, batteries, charging systems, design, installation, commissioning, repair and replace as part of my work for about 45 years, so not someone who just got interested in the field, lol.

 

Cheers

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Litlos said:

Have you found that 50%?

 

Ah, the irony of some who asks others to provide evidence he himself refuses to offer.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Litlos said:

Have you found that 50%? When you do note t

 

Also, you are assuming that solid state batteries will be no quicker to charge than those with organic liquid electrolytes.

You sure about that?

VW-backed QuantumScape says its solid-state batteries will enable EVs to travel farther and charge faster

https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/8/22158573/quantumscape-solid-state-battery-ev-range-charge-vw

 

Toyota Plans To Debut Its Fast-Charging Solid-State Battery In 2021

Earlier this year, Toyota announced it was working with Panasonic to bring solid-state batteries into production by 2025. Its fluoride-ion solid-state battery has seven times the energy density enabling a range of 1,000 km (621 miles) on a single charge. It also charges much faster (zero to full in 10 minutes), so it will be a total game-changer for the EV industry.

https://www.intelligentliving.co/toyota-fast-charging-solid-state-battery-2021/

 

And this from researchers at Harvard:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/05/210512115651.htm

 

Of course, there is the question of whom to believe: the engineers  at Volkswagen and toyota, among many others, who have advised their companies to fork out the big bucks to invest in solid-state batteries, or an anonymous poster on thaivisa who claims that 

":I also have qualifications in electronics and have been working with cells, batteries, charging systems, design, installation, commissioning, repair and replace as part of my work for about 45 years, so not someone who just got interested in the field, lol."

That's a real difficult decision to make.

 

Also, charging stations aren't the only way to get autos charged. In fact, most charging will probably take place in users' homes or in fleets' garages. Most people don't drive hundreds of kilometers in a day. And unlike autos, efficiency for electric vehicles is actually greater for stop-and-go driving than for highway driving.

Edited June 24, 2021 by placeholder

[metisdead]

A post with insulting comments to another member has been removed. 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Litlos said:

Have you found that 50%? When you do note the 15 minute bit as well. This mean it can only do the 50% charge rate for 15 minutes, probably due to heating as that is the usual reason, but not specified. So lets assume based on experience after 15 minutes the 50% charge rate must be reduced to 25% to prevent overheating (?). So for example after one hour the total charge percentage increase is approx 31.25%. Take that in the 1980's I could, and did buy high specification batteries off the shelf that were capable of a sustained 25% charge rate, think like a carbon D cell vs an Alkaline cell, higher spec, but available. So after one hour of charge the 1980's battery had a 25% increase in charge and the new "Solid State" battery has 31.25% increase in charge based on 15minute increments (12.5+6.25+6.25+6.25). The increase in charge level for one hour is plus 25% to the "Solid State" battery for 40 years and billions of dollars of investment. Hence why I am somewhat sceptical of there being a breakthrough in the next few years with battery technology irrelevant of what it is called. They have been trying to improve capacitor specifications at the same time as a capacitor can take 100% charge in milliseonds, but has poor efficiency and does not hold the charge well. It may be a breakthrough in capacitor technology that is the game changer, again not that hopeful of an imminent breakthrough.

So taking the problem back to its roots and ignoring politicians and media pronouncements the problem is diminishing oil/gas reserves and a desire to reduce pollution? The perceived solution at the moment for some is the fully electric vehicle(EV). The major inherent problems of an EV are recharge time for the cells and what to do with the cells after use, you can only drink so much coffee while waiting for a recharge on the trip to Chiang Mai or wherever. There is also the problem of how the electricity for the charging is produced, from coal or even gas is a pollution source, renewables not viable at the moment in a lot of the locations where desired, the batteries again. So a lot of hurdles for the EV. Hybrid is better for convenience, but the fuel/pollution from the engine is again problematic, but hybrid has a smaller battery setup, so less to recycle or dispose of. The mantra for pollution reduction is "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle".

So how about a a different solution that has the convenience of the current vehicle with fuel refill in minutes, batteries as per the Hybrid ( a lot battery smaller setup than an EV), the fuel is produced from 100% renewables, and can be done now without any technology breakthrough's required?

I will now add a couple of links, one is from a test done in France and the other is from a proposal being worked up in Australia between Total Eren (an associate of Total Petroleum) and Province Mining. There are numerous similar proposals around the world, interestingly one is in Saudi Arabia.

https://www.whichcar.com.au/car-news/toyota-mirai-breaks-hydrogen-distance-record

https://www.provinceresources.com/hyenergygreenhydrogen

Unfortunately it spreads a lot information over several announcements. The brief is renewable power to Hydrogen, Hydrogen H2  catalysed to Ammonia NH3, now a liquid( N=Nitrogen makes up 78% or air). Transported as a liquid (higher energy density than a gas), supplied to a vehicle as a liquid ammonia or hydrogen gas (ammonia is safer), passed through a fuel cell to power the battery and hence vehicle, hence why a hybrid type vehicle. The conversion from Hydrogen to Ammonia releases atmospheric Nitrogen, which is then vented, products of combustion for Hydrogen is H2O eg water .

Note I own shares in both Total SE and Province Mining, but as we say for share trading DYOR (Do Your Own Research). I also have qualifications in electronics and have been working with cells, batteries, charging systems, design, installation, commissioning, repair and replace as part of my work for about 45 years, so not someone who just got interested in the field, lol.

 

Cheers

 

So that's what you were referring to. It wasn't, as you were claiming before, 50% capacity. It's 50% capacity in 15 minutes. And that's for a work in progress. Ya think solid state battery technology is frozen in place at this moment. Lots of very big automobile companies backed by engineers and scientists clearly disagree with you. And by the way, BMW and Ford have also invested in solid power.....

"Solid Power, a company that is developing solid state batteries with funding from BMW Group and Ford, is working on a silicon anode battery cell that chief technology officer Joshua Buettner-Garrett says can be charged halfway in 15 minutes, and it’s targeting 20-minute full recharge rates for a commercial version. It’s also developing batteries with lithium metal anodes, which can store ten times more energy per unit mass than graphite."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/will-charging-electric-cars-ever-be-as-fast-as-pumping-gas

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Litlos said:

Have you found that 50%?

 

Ah, now I understand the problem. You seem to have a problem with understanding what "specification means". Here goes:

 

an act of describing or identifying something precisely or of stating a precise requirement.

 

Had you written a "50% charging limit for a 15 minute interval" earlier on that would be different. But since you wrote it as a 50% limit on charging that would be false. Without specifying duration your specification would naturally be taken as an absolute. It is certainly not specific. It is not the specification you claimed it to be. Ya gotta learn to write what you mean. We're not mindreaders here. Still, I suppose we should be grateful you finally got there. Good for you.

 

[CharlieH]

Reported Troll comments removed