+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 1
New This Week: 1
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 10224
Total Topics: 244
Most Online Today: 4
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Author Topic: Electric Vehicles  (Read 8421 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11006
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Electric Vehicles
« Reply #330 on: November 20, 2017, 09:26:55 pm »

GM EV1: A body design with a record-breaking .195 drag coefficient. 45% less drag and 40% lighter than the average gas car

EV Archeology — Unearthing Key Artifacts From The Annals Of Electric Car History (Part 1)

November 20th, 2017 by Steve Bakker

SNIPPET 1:

Even though the revived Impact/EV1 program had gone dark, somehow, as automakers around the globe began to wake up and smell the electricity, the entity that the automakers referred to as the “oilies” awakened as well, sniffing competition in the wind. It may be that the oil companies had simply stretched out with their Sith sense, but there was EV development taking place at virtually all the major automakers, and an alliance of the Big 3 (GM, Ford, Chrysler) had been formed to develop a more workable EV battery … with federal government participation. That’s when the Department of Dirty Tricks was engaged. But not at the bequest of GM. The auto giant had been doing its best to delay the government mandates. But as Shnayerson characterizes it, GM had been lobbying CARB pretty squarely, explaining where they were at and trying to buy time for the tech to mature. The carmaker objected to what it termed “invention on a schedule.”

The oilies, however, played a very different game. They went low-ball right out of the gate and employed strategies such as sponsoring so-called grassroots consumer groups that waved a flag about how EVs could actually make the air dirtier … in spite of a CARB study refuting the assertion. Even in the ’90s, any electricity used to charge EVs would have caused a net drop in pollutants in spite of a dirtier grid than today, due in part to the far greater efficiency of an electric motor over its gasoline counterpart (90% vs 20%). The oil-funded groups lobbied against both the mandate as well as various EV kickstart programs sponsored by the utilities. The anti-mandate movement gained further support when Governor Pete Wilson — who was running for President — was told in no uncertain terms that support in key states would be absent unless the California mandate was altered. Indeed, the 1998 mandate would end up getting rescheduled.

SNIPPET 2:

All in all, the technology developed during the Impact/EV1 program was nothing short of remarkable. A Motor Trend article of the time characterized the tech as “unparalleled breakthroughs.” Here are some of the significant accomplishments of what has been characterized as the most technically ambitious program in GM’s history:

֍ The Impact/EV1 was designed from the ground up
֍ Refinements to the AC induction motor
֍ A workable DC to AC inverter that powered the motor
֍ A breakthrough battery design using alloys (NMH)
֍ Implementation of a rudimentary battery cooling system
֍ Regenerative braking
֍ 8 second 0–60 MPH time
֍ A body design with a record-breaking .195 drag coefficient. 45% less drag and 40% lighter than the average gas car
֍ Aluminum frame, plastic body panels
֍ Electric brakes (80,000 lines of software code allowed for 100 fewer brake parts)
֍ Covered wheels to reduce drag
֍ First use of a heat pump in a vehicle
֍ An inductive charger to reduce the chance of shock
֍ A network of over 1,000 high-speed “MagneChargers” in homes and public locations
֍ 23 new patents granted
֍ First time in GM history a woman headed one of the production departments

In addition to that impressive list, the isolated Impact/EV1 program had at least one staffer on board with deep insight as to what GM had achieved. Take a look at this passage from Shnayerson’s book characterizing John Dabels’ point of view:

And yet the electric car failed to hit critical mass at that point in time. Those who have seen Who Killed The Electric Car? know that the automakers ultimately sued the State of California, won the suit, and the CARB mandates of the day were repealed. Shortly thereafter, GM stopped production of the EV1, and in fact recalled all the vehicles and destroyed most of them.

Who Killed The Electric Car?

Full article:

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/20/ev-archeology-unearthing-key-artifacts-annals-electric-car-history-part-1/



Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
264 Views
Last post December 07, 2014, 01:49:28 am
by AGelbert
3 Replies
267 Views
Last post May 19, 2014, 01:16:07 am
by AGelbert
2 Replies
253 Views
Last post July 11, 2017, 07:11:00 pm
by AGelbert
0 Replies
104 Views
Last post June 01, 2017, 05:52:22 pm
by AGelbert

+-Recent Topics

Welcome! by AGelbert
Today at 12:34:29 pm

The Many Health Benefits of Cryotherapy by AGelbert
Today at 12:19:20 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
Today at 12:14:53 pm

Genocide by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 05:54:02 pm

Non-routine News by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 05:30:57 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 05:07:39 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 04:41:58 pm

Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 04:38:51 pm

Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 02:12:02 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
July 18, 2018, 01:44:52 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial