Tesla has already proven that EVs are inherently better — Credit Suisse

“We believe that Tesla has already proven that EVs [electric vehicles] are inherently better, although most industry observers, & certainly the general public, don’t know it yet.” — Credit Suisse analysts Dan Galves & Shreyas Patil

"Inherently better"? How?

In relatively few words: instant throttle response, handling, maintenance, running costs, greenhouse gas emissions, pollution & energy consumption.

Instant throttle response: Put your foot down & an EV starts accelerating. An internal combustion engine vehicle (ICE) is sluggish by comparison.

Electric motors develop maximum torque at zero rpm. An ICE develops zero torque at zero rpm. While an ICE is winding up to the point where it makes a useful amount of power, the EV is already gone. Poor throttle response, inherent in an ICE, is made worse by automatic transmission or turbo.

Handling: ICE vehicles are, with few exceptions, front engined. To make more room for passengers, it is best to use front wheel drive with the ICE as far forward as possible. ICEs are heavy & tall. This is exacerbated when an ICE is mounted above a front wheel drivetrain to make the most possible room for passengers. All of the above makes ICE vehicles nose heavy, with a high centre of gravity.

Front/rear weight distribution can be improved with front engine/rear wheel drive, but this configuration is typically still nose heavy.

A better way to improve weight distribution is to place the ICE in front of the rear wheels & behind the passengers. Problem is, this configuration only leaves space for two people.

EVs are heavy because of their large battery, but unlike an ICE, the shape of an EV battery is very flexible. This gives engineers a lot of flexibility with weight distribution. Small size & weight of electric motors helps too. Result is that EVs have a low centre of gravity & near 50/50 weight distribution. E.g. Tesla Model S, 50/50, & GM Volt 52/48. What went wrong with the Volt? Well it does have the advantage of an EV drivetrain, & so is much closer to the 50/50 ideal than 4 passenger ICE vehicles — but it has an ICE too.

Technical issues raised above are demonstrated in the video below:



Because it only has two seats, engineers were free to place passengers further back in the Corvette. This made room for a bigger engine, further back in the vehicle, thereby improving weight distribution.

On the other hand, the Model S accommodates five, or seven with the optional rear facing child seats.

The video above could have been called, "The People Mover Vs The V8 Sports Car" — & the EV people mover fights the sports car to a standstill.

Maintenance & running costs: an electric motor has one moving part. An ICE has hundreds, all grinding away at one another. And the whole thing is driven by explosions! Why does an ICE vehicle have to be serviced so often? Because of the ICE. Explosions & hundreds of pieces grinding one another to destruction have to be cooled &/or lubricated. Oil gradually loses its ability to lubricate due to contamination with fuel & combustion products. Spark plugs, air filters, oil filters & the oil itself all need to be replaced.

What Credit Suisse said:

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/credit-suisse-on-tesla-2014-8

http://chargedevs.com/newswire/credit-suisse-tesla-has-already-proven-that-evs-are-inherently-better/

Who is Credit Suisse?

https://www.credit-suisse.com/uk/en.html / air pollution carbon dioxide CO2 greenhouse gas carbon monoxide petrol diesel petroleum hydrocarbon climate change global warming EV electric vehicle LiIon lithium ion battery cell charge recharge range range anxiety /

What can be learned from debating science with trolls

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/8/20/policy-politics/what-i-learned-debating-science-trolls?utm_source=exact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=870416&utm_campaign=cs_daily&modapt= / discuss science online climate change trolls Don’t feed the trolls education tactics bloggers journalists politicians attack science climate cancer research techniques comically simple emotionally charged evidence-free accusations scams fraud cover-ups common lack credibility accusations polarising debate reducing understanding scientifically incompetent ideologue science religion chairman Prime Minister’s Business Advisory Council Maurice Newman old chestnut Australia’s Chief Scientist Ian Chubb online media recently experts Internet trolls experts professors academia contrarians contrarian views respected professors Harvard MIT Princeton science vitriol disconnected knowledge expertise expert opinion totally misrepresented remarkable confidence findings CSIRO’s John Church sea levels distortions variability this century may reduce warming degrees Celsius very small fraction of the warming human activity quote quoted correctly disagree with the vast majority of their equally qualified or more qualified colleagues scientifically illiterate minority of experts choosing experts agreeable conclusions scientific rigour media statement doctor shopping expert opinion misleading conclusions broken logic attacks on science employ flawed logic carbon dioxide CO2 emissions rapid climate change anthropogenic climate change climate change deniers anthropogenic global warming Minister Tony Abbott anthropic Galileo Italian scientist astronomer Galileo Galilei infamously persecuted politically powerful Catholic Church supported by observation Galileo Gambit debating technique perverts history defend nonsense vast majority of scientists minority promoting pseudoscience equated Galileo no scientific expertise ideological reasons attacking science consensus view of climate scientists tactic of trolls cranks /