Japanese firm believes it could make a solid-state battery with a range of 745 miles that charges in 10 minutes

Japanese firm believes it could make a solid-state battery with a range of 745 miles that charges in 10 minutes

  •  healthetank   ( @healthetank@lemmy.ca ) English
    2•1 year ago

    Yes, but the power draw of those systems are less than the 40% figure you cited. Anyone who lives somewhere cold and doesn’t get a heat pump on their battery is stupid, and not a fair comparison. As I mentioned, the battery life is closer to losing 10% than 40% in real life tests of the vehicles, and that lines up with my experiences.

    Source

    Kona Electric wins Norwegian real-range validation test

    The Norwegian Automotive Federation (NAF) recently compared 20 EVs in cold and warm weather conditions to identify models with the most consistent driving range and charging performance. The test monitored the performance deviation of each vehicle in cold conditions compared to quoted manufacturer figures.

    The Kona Electric took first place, travelling 405km in the cold – compared to the 449km quoted under WLTP combined cycle testing conditions (23°C / 73°F). In severe cold weather, the Kona Electric offered 91 percent of its WLTP combined cycle range, deviating just 9 percent from its claimed all-electric driving range.

    •  Umbrias   ( @Umbrias@beehaw.org ) English
      1•1 year ago

      Ultimately depends on the car and the engineering. You’ll note that I am speaking in favor of safety. Nonetheless I didn’t come here to argue about individual car specs, I came here to point out that getting up to 700 miles of range is a huge benefit, and that many parts of the US and many people in the US need cars with larger ranges than 300 mi.

      Yes some cars dont lose very much range in the winter, some lose as much as 30% from real testing. There’s no magic generalization here, I used 40% as a safety factor.

        •  Umbrias   ( @Umbrias@beehaw.org ) English
          1•1 year ago

          Yes some cars dont lose very much range in the winter, some lose as much as 30% from real testing. There’s no magic generalization here, I used 40% as a safety factor.

          •  Vodulas [they/them]   ( @Vodulas@beehaw.org ) English
            1•1 year ago

            Safety factor based on what though? There is nothing to support that most cars would lose 40% of their range, but you added 10% to real world data and called it a “safety factor” to try to legitimize what you said.

            •  Umbrias   ( @Umbrias@beehaw.org ) English
              1•1 year ago

              Yes that’s… what a safety factor is. You add a margin on the worst case scenario to cover what you didn’t foresee. When discussing something online, especially off the cuff, adding in safety factors especially when it’s something you’re biased towards is just good practice.

              For example, things that add into that safety factor are things you’d want to include when doing the same discussion on ICE cars, where the HVAC can impact fuel economy substantially. Something that isn’t included in the analysis from above.