Hearted Youtube comments on Two Bit da Vinci (@TwoBitDaVinci) channel.

  1. 41
  2. 41
  3. 41
  4. 41
  5. 41
  6. 41
  7. 40
  8. 40
  9. 40
  10. 40
  11. 40
  12. 39
  13. 39
  14. 38
  15. 38
  16. 38
  17. 38
  18. 38
  19. 38
  20. 38
  21. Man... You California LEFT coast people need to get out a LOT more. I live in Canada. I was born and lived in Labrador. This whole malarkey with plugging in is long gone. I haven't had to plug in my cars since I started owning cars some 25 years ago. Unless you live in Oymyakon in Siberia and it is the dead of winter, "petrol" cars work marvelously in the winter. Where I live, the deep winter night temps REGULARLY go as low as -25 C and many daytimes that are that bad too. Your precious Tesla is NOT going to do well on those days or the ones close to that. My new 2017 Civic has a start button and never ONCE had a hard time starting. Also, those "Canadian" owners? I can assure you they are NOT representative of Canadian winters. Vancouver = Seattle. Toronto = NYC (Due to all the lake water warmth and the sheer sprawl of Toronto). Montreal, maybe something there but nothing compared to the rest of the populated areas. Give me the data for Edmonton or Ft Mac or Winnipeg. I want my car to go a KNOWN distance EVERY day. No guessing based on if it is cold. I have said this once, twice, and many times more... BATTERY cars are NOT the future. Electric cars are. The issue is and has always been storage. The answer is and has always been capacitors. Graphene will allow for the energy densities that existing capacitors can't provide. Capacitors allow for ALL weather condition operation and can be charged or discharged at effectively any rate and won't wear out anywhere close to what happens with a battery. The reason is simple. As long as the storage medium is electrochemical, it is a failure. Electrostatic is the only answer and also THE answer as it will also solve all manner of grid storage and solar storage and discharge issues. Unless solid state batteries can challenge capacitors, I stand by my statement until something better than either is invented.
    37
  22. 37
  23. 37
  24. 37
  25. 37
  26. 37
  27. 36
  28. 36
  29. 36
  30. 36
  31. The concept of a range extended EV isn't new. I have a BWM i3 REx, which is one of the only production vehicles I know of that uses this architecture. It's essentially a "series plug-in hybrid", but what makes it a range-extended EV is that your primary "fuel" is electricity from the battery, which ultimately comes from the grid or home rooftop solar, and gasoline is supposed to be your secondary fuel, or support to bridge the gaps between charging stations on a road trip. It works really well. The only problem with the series hybrid design is that it's less efficient than letting the engine directly drive the wheels. Toyota's hybrid architecture is "series-parallel" such that the engine can, in certain conditions, directly provide mechanical output to the drive shaft/transaxle. This is especially desirable if your battery is depleted and you're cruising at highway speeds, and even though it results in a more complex "transmission" (e.g. with a planetary gearset, or a clutch pack like the Honda Clarity PHEV), it is ultimately more efficient when running on gas than a series hybrid. The inefficiency of the series hybrid is awfully clear when you consider how it runs when the battery is nearly depleted. It generates mechanical work, then a generator converts that to electricity, then that electricity goes into the battery, then the battery gets discharged to drive the electric motors, which convert the electricity back to mechanical work. Every time the energy is converted, you lose some efficiency. Even if each step is very efficient, when you combine them together, you lose a lot of energy. Regenerative braking helps a lot in heavy traffic, but if you're going at highway speeds over long distances, running on the REx is gets pretty poor MPG. It's in the high 20s last I tested, like 28 MPG. Icky. If I had my way, we would adopt one of these small-and-light "generator" designs -- this one or some other -- as the range extender in a so-called "series-parallel plugin hybrid" with an architecture similar to the Toyota Prius Prime or Rav4 Prime, but with a much larger battery pack. Let's say we can shrink the weight and size of the engine by 50% and triple the size of the battery pack. This would give us an EV range around 150 miles, which is enough for all but road trips. Then we'd have an 8-10 gallon gas tank which can easily bridge the gap between charging stations, even if you pull into an Electrify America station and all the chargers are broken. Oh well, just drive on gasoline for another 20 miles until you find the next one. A car of this design would work perfectly fine even in a charging "desert" (where all the chargers are broken, or they don't exist), and at a decent fuel efficiency, too (probably 40 mpg or higher in a mid-size sedan configuration). But it would also have 150 miles of EV range, so if you charge it up at home, nearly all trips, even "regional" trips (say, trips from the Baltimore area to the Washington DC area) could be taken completely on electricity. But if you needed to drive out to the midwest, and you couldn't find good chargers or didn't have time to stop, you could just keep driving on gasoline, and fill up every 200-250 miles at a gas station. That would be the "dream car" for me, and I would probably buy cars that operate on that architecture for the rest of my life. 95% of my driving would be fueled by the grid (so, its "cleanliness" would depend on the energy mix of the power grid) and partially offset by my rooftop solar. The remaining 5%, those long distance trips, would not require me to rent a car -- I would just use gas to the extent necessary.
    36
  32. 36
  33. 36
  34. 35
  35. 35
  36. 35
  37. 35
  38. 35
  39. 35
  40. 35
  41. 35
  42. 35
  43. 34
  44. 34
  45. 34
  46. 34
  47. 34
  48. 34
  49. 34
  50. 34