crest logo banner adsolstice ad
site map
Main    Discussion Archives register comment
home
energy and environment
discussion groups
calendar
repp
gem
about us
employment
discussion groups
efficiency efficiency miropower micropower solar solar wind wind geothermal geo bioenergy bioenergy hydro hydro
Ev Archive for October 2000
1516 messages, last added Wed Aug 08 18:49:55 2001

[Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Range



> > It seems to me that if you have a 50 mile requirement you are better
> > off with a 60 mile (max) pack than a 100 mile pack.
>
> Ah, but the pack's capacity drops as it ages. If you use 80% of the
> pack's capacity for your daily commute when it is new, then your
> batteries are "bad" when their capacity falls to 80% because they can no
> longer make the commute. If you use 50% of the pack's capacity when new,
> the batteries can still make the commute when they have aged to only
> deliver 50% of original capacity. You'll get over twice the battery
> life.
> --

Ahh, but you have to buy almost twice as much weight in batteries, and they
cost more to haul around.  I think in the long run it would be cheaper to
have the smaller pack (smaller controller, smaller motor and/or better
performance, lower daily energy requirements).



  • References:
    • Re: Range
      • From: "VanDerWal, Peter" <vanderwp@fhu.disa.mil>
    • Re: Range
      • From: Lee Hart <leeahart@earthlink.net>